Adams v. James

Missouri Court of Appeals

Adams v. James

906 S.W.2d 869, 1995 Mo. App. LEXIS 1416, 1995 WL 464808

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 8, 1995·No. No. 67304·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Craig S. Adams, appeals from the judgment in his court-tried defamation action against respondents Gary D. James, Connie Roberts, and James Van Amburg. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the judgment is supported by the evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence, and no error of law appears. As an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the circuit court’s judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Craig S. Adams, appeals from the judgment in his court-tried defamation action against respondents Gary D. James, Connie Roberts, and James Van Amburg. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the judgment is supported by the evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence, and no error of law appears. As an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the circuit court’s judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Adams v. James, 906 S.W.2d 869, 1995 Mo. App. LEXIS 1416, 1995 WL 464808 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

906 S.W.2d 869 (Adams v. James) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related