Mense v. Eckelkamp

Missouri Court of Appeals

Mense v. Eckelkamp

934 S.W.2d 20, 1996 Mo. App. LEXIS 1859, 1996 WL 653807

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 12, 1996·No. No. 69083·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM DECISION

PER CURIAM.

Defendant Gene Eckelkamp appeals the trial court’s judgment in a court-tried case awarding damages to plaintiff. Defendant on appeal challenges only the trial court’s denial of his oral motion for continuance made at the time of trial. Ecklekamp appeared pro se when the court granted his trial counsel’s motion for withdrawal one week prior to this scheduled trial. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the continuance. Lamastus v. Lamastus, 886 S.W.2d 721 (Mo.App.1994).

An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a statement supporting this decision.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

MEMORANDUM DECISION

PER CURIAM.

Defendant Gene Eckelkamp appeals the trial court’s judgment in a court-tried case awarding damages to plaintiff. Defendant on appeal challenges only the trial court’s denial of his oral motion for continuance made at the time of trial. Ecklekamp appeared pro se when the court granted his trial counsel’s motion for withdrawal one week prior to this scheduled trial. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the continuance. Lamastus v. Lamastus, 886 S.W.2d 721 (Mo.App.1994).

An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a statement supporting this decision.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Mense v. Eckelkamp, 934 S.W.2d 20, 1996 Mo. App. LEXIS 1859, 1996 WL 653807 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

934 S.W.2d 20 (Mense v. Eckelkamp) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related