Bus. Bank of Saint Louis v. Brown & James, P.C.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Bus. Bank of Saint Louis v. Brown & James, P.C.

546 S.W.3d 605

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 13, 2018

DocketED 105566

StatusPublished

This text of 546 S.W.3d 605 (Bus. Bank of Saint Louis v. Brown & James, P.C.) 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

Bus. Bank of Saint Louis v. Brown & James, P.C., 546 S.W.3d 605 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Business Bank of Saint Louis (Appellant) appeals from the March 27, 2017 Final Judgment of the trial court entering summary judgment in favor of Brown & James, P.C. (Respondent) on Counts I and II of Appellant's Second Amended Petition and dismissing Count III for failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude Respondent was entitled to judgment as a matter of law on Counts I and II, ITT Commercial Fin. Corp. v. Mid-Am. Marine Supply Corp., 854 S.W.2d 371, 376 (Mo. banc 1993) ; and Count III failed to state a claim. Philips v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 430 S.W.3d 324, 329 (Mo. App. E.D. 2014). 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 decision 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

PER CURIAM.

The Business Bank of Saint Louis (Appellant) appeals from the March 27, 2017 Final Judgment of the trial court entering summary judgment in favor of Brown & James, P.C. (Respondent) on Counts I and II of Appellant's Second Amended Petition and dismissing Count III for failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude Respondent was entitled to judgment as a matter of law on Counts I and II, ITT Commercial Fin. Corp. v. Mid-Am. Marine Supply Corp., 854 S.W.2d 371, 376 (Mo. banc 1993) ; and Count III failed to state a claim. Philips v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 430 S.W.3d 324, 329 (Mo. App. E.D. 2014). 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 decision pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

546 S.W.3d 605, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bus-bank-of-saint-louis-v-brown-james-pc-moctapp-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack