Coburn v. Dunkel

Missouri Court of Appeals

Coburn v. Dunkel

823 S.W.2d 47, 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 1639, 1991 WL 216090

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 29, 1991·No. No. 59703·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Cesar A. Dunkel appeals from a jury verdict and judgment for plaintiffs on their claim for attorneys’ fees. The judgment was entered against Cesar A. Dunkel, individually, on a breach of contract claim and against Infocast, Inc., and Cesar A. Dunkel, as alter ego of Infocast, Inc., on claims of quantum merit. The corporation is not a party to this appeal. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would not have precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting forth the reasons for our order. Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Cesar A. Dunkel appeals from a jury verdict and judgment for plaintiffs on their claim for attorneys’ fees. The judgment was entered against Cesar A. Dunkel, individually, on a breach of contract claim and against Infocast, Inc., and Cesar A. Dunkel, as alter ego of Infocast, Inc., on claims of quantum merit. The corporation is not a party to this appeal. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would not have precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting forth the reasons for our order. Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Coburn v. Dunkel, 823 S.W.2d 47, 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 1639, 1991 WL 216090 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

823 S.W.2d 47 (Coburn v. Dunkel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.