Daniel Schmitt & Co. v. Arcese

547 S.W.3d 823
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 29, 2018·No. No. ED 106091·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Anthony Arcese filed action against Daniel Schmitt and Company ("DSC") alleging violations of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act ("MMPA"), fraud, and negligent misrepresentation. The trial *824court granted summary judgment in favor of DSC on Arcese's claims of fraud and negligent misrepresentation. Following a bench trial, the trial court entered judgment in favor of DSC and awarded DSC attorney's fees. Arcese appealed from the trial court's judgment, and this Court reversed the trial court's award of attorney's fees and court costs to DSC. Arcese v. Daniel Schmitt & Co., 504 S.W.3d 772, 790 (Mo. App. E.D. 2016) (" Arcese I").

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Daniel Schmitt & Co. v. Arcese, 547 S.W.3d 823 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

547 S.W.3d 823 (Daniel Schmitt & Co. v. Arcese) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anthony Arcese v. Daniel Schmitt & Company
504 S.W.3d 772 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2016)