Ilyashov v. Lo

Missouri Court of Appeals

Ilyashov v. Lo

415 S.W.3d 708, 2013 WL 5476836, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 1132

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 1, 2013·No. No. ED 99008·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Alina Ilyashov appeals from the judgment of the trial court entered after a jury awarded her $10,500.00 in damages on her negligence claim. Ilyashov contends that the trial court erred in allowing defendant, Cindy Lo, to amend her answer, and in submitting a disjunctive comparative fault instruction to the jury.

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.

[709] 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.

Alina Ilyashov appeals from the judgment of the trial court entered after a jury awarded her $10,500.00 in damages on her negligence claim. Ilyashov contends that the trial court erred in allowing defendant, Cindy Lo, to amend her answer, and in submitting a disjunctive comparative fault instruction to the jury.

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.

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

Ilyashov v. Lo, 415 S.W.3d 708, 2013 WL 5476836, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 1132 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

415 S.W.3d 708 (Ilyashov v. Lo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.