Hankins v. Cincinnati, Inc.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Hankins v. Cincinnati, Inc.

280 S.W.3d 169, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 439, 2009 WL 884717

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 31, 2009·No. No. ED 91226·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Kevin Hankins appeals from the judgment of the trial court following a jury verdict in favor of defendant Cincinnati, Inc., which found both Hankins and Cincinnati to be zero percent at fault, awarding no damages to Hankins. Finding no error, we affirm.

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 opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Kevin Hankins appeals from the judgment of the trial court following a jury verdict in favor of defendant Cincinnati, Inc., which found both Hankins and Cincinnati to be zero percent at fault, awarding no damages to Hankins. Finding no error, we affirm.

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 opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Hankins v. Cincinnati, Inc., 280 S.W.3d 169, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 439, 2009 WL 884717 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

280 S.W.3d 169 (Hankins v. Cincinnati, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.