Anderson v. US Bank National Association

Missouri Court of Appeals

Anderson v. US Bank National Association

339 S.W.3d 519, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 330

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 15, 2011

DocketED 95511

StatusPublished

This text of 339 S.W.3d 519 (Anderson v. US Bank National Association) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Anderson v. US Bank National Association, 339 S.W.3d 519, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 330 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Pamela Anderson appeals from the circuit court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of U.S. Bank National Association (Defendant). We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the circuit court did not err in granting Defendant’s motion because there is no genuine issue of material fact and Defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. ITT Comm. Fin. Corp. v. Mid-Am. Marine Supply Corp., 854 S.W.2d 371, 376 (Mo. banc 1993). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Pamela Anderson appeals from the circuit court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of U.S. Bank National Association (Defendant). We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the circuit court did not err in granting Defendant’s motion because there is no genuine issue of material fact and Defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. ITT Comm. Fin. Corp. v. Mid-Am. Marine Supply Corp., 854 S.W.2d 371, 376 (Mo. banc 1993). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

339 S.W.3d 519, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 330, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-us-bank-national-association-moctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack