Champion Bank v. Visionary Imaging, LLC

332 S.W.3d 222, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1755, 2010 WL 5174783
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 21, 2010·No. ED 94416·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Mann (“Mann”) appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County granting summary judgment *223 in favor of Champion Bank (“the Bank”) for payment of a debt which Mann personally guaranteed. Mann raises two points on appeal. Mann claims the trial court erred in granting the Bank’s motion for summary judgment because the guaranty agreement was voidable due to fraudulent misrepresentations made by the Bank. Mann also claims the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because there were genuine issues of material fact as to whether the bank’s misrepresentations rendered the guaranty agreement voidable.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, which sets forth the facts and reasons for this order.

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

Champion Bank v. Visionary Imaging, LLC, 332 S.W.3d 222, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1755, 2010 WL 5174783 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

332 S.W.3d 222 (Champion Bank v. Visionary Imaging, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brinker v. CAPITAL RESTORATION & PAINTING COMPANY
332 S.W.3d 222 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2010)