KING, KREHBIEL, HELLMICH & BORBONUS, LLC v. Essen

325 S.W.3d 542, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1371, 2010 WL 3971327
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 12, 2010·No. ED 94161·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Carl D. Essen (Essen) appeals from the trial court’s judgment in favor of King, Krehbiel, Hellmich, and Borbonus, LLC (Respondent). Following a bench trial, *543 the trial court found that Respondent was entitled to recover on a contract for an account of $5,475.00 plus interest. We find that substantial evidence supports the trial court’s judgment and we affirm the judgment.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find Essen is entitled to no relief on appeal. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the trial court’s judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

KING, KREHBIEL, HELLMICH & BORBONUS, LLC v. Essen, 325 S.W.3d 542, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1371, 2010 WL 3971327 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

325 S.W.3d 542 (KING, KREHBIEL, HELLMICH & BORBONUS, LLC v. Essen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lockhart v. State
325 S.W.3d 542 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2010)