Baker v. G.J. Grewe, Inc.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Baker v. G.J. Grewe, Inc.

241 S.W.3d 420, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1728, 2007 WL 4391178

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 18, 2007

DocketED 89755

StatusPublished

This text of 241 S.W.3d 420 (Baker v. G.J. Grewe, Inc.) 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

Baker v. G.J. Grewe, Inc., 241 S.W.3d 420, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1728, 2007 WL 4391178 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Billy Baker (“Baker”), appeals from the judgment of the trial court granting summary judgment in favor of G. J. Grewe, Inc. (“Grewe, Inc.”) and Thirty & 141 Properties, Inc. (“Thirty & 141”) (collectively “Defendants”). Baker argues the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of Defendants because there were genuine issues of material fact in dispute and Defendants were not entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Billy Baker (“Baker”), appeals from the judgment of the trial court granting summary judgment in favor of G. J. Grewe, Inc. (“Grewe, Inc.”) and Thirty & 141 Properties, Inc. (“Thirty & 141”) (collectively “Defendants”). Baker argues the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of Defendants because there were genuine issues of material fact in dispute and Defendants were not entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

241 S.W.3d 420, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1728, 2007 WL 4391178, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baker-v-gj-grewe-inc-moctapp-2007.