Schneider v. Clevenger

Missouri Court of Appeals

Schneider v. Clevenger

375 S.W.3d 833, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 782, 2012 WL 2107919

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 12, 2012·No. No. ED 96172·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals pro se from an adverse judgment. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating,the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). Plaintiffs motions to dismiss and for other relief are denied.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals pro se from an adverse judgment. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating,the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). Plaintiffs motions to dismiss and for other relief are denied.

Schneider v. Clevenger, 375 S.W.3d 833, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 782, 2012 WL 2107919 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

375 S.W.3d 833 (Schneider v. Clevenger) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.