Schneider v. SNOW CREEK, INC.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Schneider v. SNOW CREEK, INC.

340 S.W.3d 220, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 413, 2011 WL 1118513

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 29, 2011

DocketWD 71134

StatusPublished

This text of 340 S.W.3d 220 (Schneider v. SNOW CREEK, INC.) 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

Schneider v. SNOW CREEK, INC., 340 S.W.3d 220, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 413, 2011 WL 1118513 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Richard and Lori Schneider, as parents and next friends of Calvin Schneider, their minor son, appeal from a judgment entered in the Circuit Court of Platte County in favor of Respondents, Snow Creek, Inc. *221 and Peak Resorts, Inc., in a negligence case filed by the Schneiders on behalf of Calvin. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that the judgment is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence, and that no error of law appears. A formal written opinion would have no precedential value; however, a memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision has been provided to the parties.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Richard and Lori Schneider, as parents and next friends of Calvin Schneider, their minor son, appeal from a judgment entered in the Circuit Court of Platte County in favor of Respondents, Snow Creek, Inc. *221 and Peak Resorts, Inc., in a negligence case filed by the Schneiders on behalf of Calvin. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that the judgment is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence, and that no error of law appears. A formal written opinion would have no precedential value; however, a memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision has been provided to the parties.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

340 S.W.3d 220, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 413, 2011 WL 1118513, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schneider-v-snow-creek-inc-moctapp-2011.