Finch v. KRISCHKE

Missouri Court of Appeals

Finch v. KRISCHKE

249 S.W.3d 927, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 519, 2008 WL 1778207

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 15, 2008

DocketED 90302

StatusPublished

This text of 249 S.W.3d 927 (Finch v. KRISCHKE) 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

Finch v. KRISCHKE, 249 S.W.3d 927, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 519, 2008 WL 1778207 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Gary Finch (“Plaintiff’) appeals from the denial of his motion to set aside a judgment dismissing his case against Katie Krischke (“Defendant”) for damages sustained in an automobile accident.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b). Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiffs notice of appeal that was taken with the ease is hereby denied.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Gary Finch (“Plaintiff’) appeals from the denial of his motion to set aside a judgment dismissing his case against Katie Krischke (“Defendant”) for damages sustained in an automobile accident.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b). Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiffs notice of appeal that was taken with the ease is hereby denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 S.W.3d 927, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 519, 2008 WL 1778207, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/finch-v-krischke-moctapp-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack