Chatten v. Bampton

Missouri Court of Appeals

Chatten v. Bampton

505 S.W.3d 852, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1295, 2016 WL 7387704

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 20, 2016

DocketED 102225

StatusPublished

This text of 505 S.W.3d 852 (Chatten v. Bampton) 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

Chatten v. Bampton, 505 S.W.3d 852, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1295, 2016 WL 7387704 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Gregory C. Chatten appeals the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Dennis Bampton, Tod Bampton, and Vernon Dury, II.¹ We have reviewed de novo the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and we find Appellant’s claims of error to be without merit. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential 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) (2016).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Gregory C. Chatten appeals the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Dennis Bampton, Tod Bampton, and Vernon Dury, II.¹ We have reviewed de novo the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and we find Appellant’s claims of error to be without merit. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential 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) (2016).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

505 S.W.3d 852, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1295, 2016 WL 7387704, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chatten-v-bampton-moctapp-2016.