Gordon v. Babcock
Opinion
ORDER
Michael Babcock (Appellant) appeals from a trial court judgment denying Appellant’s Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and [87]*87conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Appellant’s Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment because the motion does not state facts constituting a meritorious defense and does not show good cause. Hinton v. Proctor & Schwartz, Inc., 99 S.W.3d 454, 458 (Mo.App. E.D.2003); Rule 74.05(d).1 An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
181 S.W.3d 86 (Gordon v. Babcock) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.