Seyer v. Sievers

Missouri Court of Appeals

Seyer v. Sievers

324 S.W.3d 493, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1519, 2010 WL 4483508

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 9, 2010·No. ED 94151·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Brian Sievers, et al. appeals the trial court’s decision that Matthew Seyer was entitled to a statutory way of necessity. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal and find no error. We find the ruling in Hill v. Kennoy, Inc., 522 S.W.2d 775 (Mo. banc 1975) to be dispositive.

An opinion would have no precedential value. The trial court’s judgment is affirmed 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.

Brian Sievers, et al. appeals the trial court’s decision that Matthew Seyer was entitled to a statutory way of necessity. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal and find no error. We find the ruling in Hill v. Kennoy, Inc., 522 S.W.2d 775 (Mo. banc 1975) to be dispositive.

An opinion would have no precedential value. The trial court’s judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Seyer v. Sievers, 324 S.W.3d 493, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1519, 2010 WL 4483508 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

324 S.W.3d 493 (Seyer v. Sievers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related