Overy v. Borovic

Missouri Court of Appeals

Overy v. Borovic

436 S.W.3d 239, 2013 WL 1966226, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 577

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 14, 2013·No. No. ED 98734·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Kristina Borovic (“Defendant”) appeals from the judgment of the trial court, entered pursuant to a jury verdict in favor of Randy Overy (“Plaintiff’) for personal injuries sustained in a motor vehicle collision involving Defendant’s automobile and Plaintiffs motorcycle. On appeal, Defendant asserts four points of trial court error. The first three points allege instructional error. Defendant’s final point alleges error in allowing a non-disclosed witness to testify. We find no trial court error; therefore, we affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment of the motion court pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Kristina Borovic (“Defendant”) appeals from the judgment of the trial court, entered pursuant to a jury verdict in favor of Randy Overy (“Plaintiff’) for personal injuries sustained in a motor vehicle collision involving Defendant’s automobile and Plaintiffs motorcycle. On appeal, Defendant asserts four points of trial court error. The first three points allege instructional error. Defendant’s final point alleges error in allowing a non-disclosed witness to testify. We find no trial court error; therefore, we affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment of the motion court pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Overy v. Borovic, 436 S.W.3d 239, 2013 WL 1966226, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 577 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

436 S.W.3d 239 (Overy v. Borovic) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.