Anderson v. NAUERT

Missouri Court of Appeals

Anderson v. NAUERT

296 S.W.3d 500, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1496, 2009 WL 3259993

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 13, 2009·No. ED 92323·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Elizabeth Anderson (Plaintiff) appeals the trial court’s declaratory judgment in favor of Sarue Nauert, Anthony and Phyllis Box, Old Republic National Title Company, and Washington Mutual Bank (Defendants) in connection with a secured loan that Plaintiffs late husband made to Ms. Nauert. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the trial court’s decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the 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.

Elizabeth Anderson (Plaintiff) appeals the trial court’s declaratory judgment in favor of Sarue Nauert, Anthony and Phyllis Box, Old Republic National Title Company, and Washington Mutual Bank (Defendants) in connection with a secured loan that Plaintiffs late husband made to Ms. Nauert. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the trial court’s decision was not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Anderson v. NAUERT, 296 S.W.3d 500, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1496, 2009 WL 3259993 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

296 S.W.3d 500 (Anderson v. NAUERT) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.