Meeks v. Lewis

Missouri Court of Appeals

Meeks v. Lewis

282 S.W.3d 413, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 685, 2009 WL 1203364

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 5, 2009

DocketED 91929

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 282 S.W.3d 413 (Meeks v. Lewis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Meeks v. Lewis, 282 S.W.3d 413, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 685, 2009 WL 1203364 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Douglas B. Meeks appeals from the trial court’s judgment denying his petition requesting a concealed carry endorsement. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the judgment of the trial court was supported by substantial evidence, was not against the weight of the evidence, and did not erroneously declare or apply the law.

*414 Murphy v. Carrón, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976). 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 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.

Douglas B. Meeks appeals from the trial court’s judgment denying his petition requesting a concealed carry endorsement. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the judgment of the trial court was supported by substantial evidence, was not against the weight of the evidence, and did not erroneously declare or apply the law.

*414 Murphy v. Carrón, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976). 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 Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 S.W.3d 413, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 685, 2009 WL 1203364, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meeks-v-lewis-moctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack