Carr v. PURSCELL

Missouri Court of Appeals

Carr v. PURSCELL

284 S.W.3d 772, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 789, 2009 WL 1586027

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 9, 2009·No. WD 69725·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Benjamin Purscell appeals from a judgment entered against him in the Circuit Court of Pettis County in an action filed *773 by Tim and Amy Carr stemming from an automobile collision involving Purscell and the Carrs. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that the judgment is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence, and that no error of law appears. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a formal written opinion; however, a memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision has been provided to the parties.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Benjamin Purscell appeals from a judgment entered against him in the Circuit Court of Pettis County in an action filed *773 by Tim and Amy Carr stemming from an automobile collision involving Purscell and the Carrs. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that the judgment is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence, and that no error of law appears. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a formal written opinion; however, a memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision has been provided to the parties.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Carr v. PURSCELL, 284 S.W.3d 772, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 789, 2009 WL 1586027 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

284 S.W.3d 772 (Carr v. PURSCELL) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.