CRUST v. Carter

Missouri Court of Appeals

CRUST v. Carter

248 S.W.3d 89, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 191, 2008 WL 294831

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 5, 2008·No. WD 68101·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

William Crust appeals from the trial court’s entry of an interlocutory decree in partition, which ordered the partition and *90 sale of certain real property owned by him and Ingrid Carter as tenants in common. 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.

William Crust appeals from the trial court’s entry of an interlocutory decree in partition, which ordered the partition and *90 sale of certain real property owned by him and Ingrid Carter as tenants in common. 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).

CRUST v. Carter, 248 S.W.3d 89, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 191, 2008 WL 294831 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

248 S.W.3d 89 (CRUST v. Carter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.