Scherer ex rel. Heuring v. Scherer

84 S.W.3d 498, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 1827, 2002 WL 2004863
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedSeptember 3, 2002
DocketNo. ED 80497
StatusPublished

This text of 84 S.W.3d 498 (Scherer ex rel. Heuring v. Scherer) 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
Scherer ex rel. Heuring v. Scherer, 84 S.W.3d 498, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 1827, 2002 WL 2004863 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Elizabeth Scherer (hereinafter, “Daughter”), a minor by next friend, Rick Heuring, brought a negligent parental supervision claim against James Scherer, her father (hereinafter, “Father”), for failing to supervise her while she was riding a four-wheeler. Daughter appeals the jury verdict in favor of Father. Daughter claims that one of the instructions given to the jury regarding the liability of Father was in error. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. The instruction given by the trial court did not misdirect, mislead, or confuse the jury, and the instruction did not result in prejudicial error. Burns Nat’l. Lock Installation Co., Inc. v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co., 61 S.W.3d 262, 270 (Mo.App. E.D.2001). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only 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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
84 S.W.3d 498, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 1827, 2002 WL 2004863, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scherer-ex-rel-heuring-v-scherer-moctapp-2002.