Christian v. St. Louis Board of Police Commissioners

Missouri Court of Appeals

Christian v. St. Louis Board of Police Commissioners

391 S.W.3d 915, 2013 WL 542080, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 175

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 13, 2013·No. No. ED 98469·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Fred E. Christian (Christian) appeals pro se from the judgment granting the motion of the St. Louis Board of Police Commissioners, et. al. (Board) for Judgment on the Pleadings, or, Alternatively, for Summary Judgment and dismissing Christian’s cause of action with prejudice. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claim of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Fred E. Christian (Christian) appeals pro se from the judgment granting the motion of the St. Louis Board of Police Commissioners, et. al. (Board) for Judgment on the Pleadings, or, Alternatively, for Summary Judgment and dismissing Christian’s cause of action with prejudice. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claim of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Christian v. St. Louis Board of Police Commissioners, 391 S.W.3d 915, 2013 WL 542080, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 175 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

391 S.W.3d 915 (Christian v. St. Louis Board of Police Commissioners) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.