Rodgers v. Fife

Missouri Court of Appeals

Rodgers v. Fife

500 S.W.3d 846, 2016 WL 1578888, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 372

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 19, 2016·No. No. ED 103563·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Reginald Rogers appeals from the dismissal of his declaratory judgment action, in which he sought a court order reinstating 184 days of credit toward his criminal sentence. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the .claim of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential or precedential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties Setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment 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

Reginald Rogers appeals from the dismissal of his declaratory judgment action, in which he sought a court order reinstating 184 days of credit toward his criminal sentence. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the .claim of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential or precedential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties Setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Rodgers v. Fife, 500 S.W.3d 846, 2016 WL 1578888, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 372 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

500 S.W.3d 846 (Rodgers v. Fife) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.