Shapiro v. Rothschild Development, Ltd.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Shapiro v. Rothschild Development, Ltd.

964 S.W.2d 852, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 315, 1998 WL 72848

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 24, 1998·No. No. 72825·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff appeals from the entry of summary judgment in favor of defendant in plaintiff’s suit against his landlord for personal injuries sustained as a result of a criminal robbery and assault by third parties occurring on a parking lot owned by the landlord and made available for use by tenants. The facts were undisputed and the issue presented is solely one of law. No error of law appears and the summary judgment was properly granted. Kopoian v. George Miller & Co., Inc., 901 S.W.2d 63 (Mo.App.1995). An opinion would serve no precedential purpose. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff appeals from the entry of summary judgment in favor of defendant in plaintiff’s suit against his landlord for personal injuries sustained as a result of a criminal robbery and assault by third parties occurring on a parking lot owned by the landlord and made available for use by tenants. The facts were undisputed and the issue presented is solely one of law. No error of law appears and the summary judgment was properly granted. Kopoian v. George Miller & Co., Inc., 901 S.W.2d 63 (Mo.App.1995). An opinion would serve no precedential purpose. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Shapiro v. Rothschild Development, Ltd., 964 S.W.2d 852, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 315, 1998 WL 72848 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

964 S.W.2d 852 (Shapiro v. Rothschild Development, Ltd.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related