Franks v. Tunstall

Missouri Court of Appeals

Franks v. Tunstall

557 S.W.3d 539

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 2, 2018

DocketED 105924

StatusPublished

This text of 557 S.W.3d 539 (Franks v. Tunstall) 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

Franks v. Tunstall, 557 S.W.3d 539 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Rhonda Tunstall (Tenant) appeals the trial court's judgment awarding possession of premises she rented from Lamont A. Franks, Jr. (Landlord) and finding no unpaid rent due. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and no error of law appears. The judgment is supported by substantial evidence and not against the weight of the evidence. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The decision is affirmed. Mo. R. Civ. P. 84.16(b) (2018).

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

PER CURIAM.

Rhonda Tunstall (Tenant) appeals the trial court's judgment awarding possession of premises she rented from Lamont A. Franks, Jr. (Landlord) and finding no unpaid rent due. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and no error of law appears. The judgment is supported by substantial evidence and not against the weight of the evidence. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The decision is affirmed. Mo. R. Civ. P. 84.16(b) (2018).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

557 S.W.3d 539, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/franks-v-tunstall-moctapp-2018.