Interfood, Inc. v. Rice

Missouri Court of Appeals

Interfood, Inc. v. Rice

404 S.W.3d 272, 2012 WL 4356159, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1182

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 25, 2012·No. No. ED 97646·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Larry Rice, Michael Husmann and DF Ingredients, Inc. appeal from the trial court’s judgment of contempt in favor of Interfood, Inc., Waltepco Holding Company, Waltepco Realestate, Inc., Tepco B.V. and F.C.G.M. van Stipdonk. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court committed no error in entering the contempt judgment. 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 them use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Larry Rice, Michael Husmann and DF Ingredients, Inc. appeal from the trial court’s judgment of contempt in favor of Interfood, Inc., Waltepco Holding Company, Waltepco Realestate, Inc., Tepco B.V. and F.C.G.M. van Stipdonk. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court committed no error in entering the contempt judgment. 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 them use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Interfood, Inc. v. Rice, 404 S.W.3d 272, 2012 WL 4356159, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1182 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

404 S.W.3d 272 (Interfood, Inc. v. Rice) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related