Schwent v. Evans

Missouri Court of Appeals

Schwent v. Evans

487 S.W.3d 503, 2016 WL 1578970, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 355

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 19, 2016

DocketNo. ED 102734

StatusPublished

This text of 487 S.W.3d 503 (Schwent v. Evans) 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

Schwent v. Evans, 487 S.W.3d 503, 2016 WL 1578970, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 355 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Timothy Schwent appeals from the probate court’s judgment finding in favor of Roy Evans, Madonna Livingston, Michelle Craven, and Sherry Mistretta (collectively Respondents) on claims related to the construction of a trust and amendment thereto by Helen D. Just prior to her death. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the probate court committed no error in entering judgment in favor of Respondents. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons [504]*504for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Timothy Schwent appeals from the probate court’s judgment finding in favor of Roy Evans, Madonna Livingston, Michelle Craven, and Sherry Mistretta (collectively Respondents) on claims related to the construction of a trust and amendment thereto by Helen D. Just prior to her death. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the probate court committed no error in entering judgment in favor of Respondents. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons [504]*504for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

487 S.W.3d 503, 2016 WL 1578970, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 355, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schwent-v-evans-moctapp-2016.