Sherman v. Hill

Missouri Court of Appeals

Sherman v. Hill

280 S.W.3d 699, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 129, 2009 WL 230540

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 3, 2009·No. WD 69463·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Edward Sherman appeals the judgment of the trial court in favor of Norris and Terry Hill on their counterclaim. On appeal, Sherman claims that the trial court erred in entering judgment in favor of the Hills because the correspondence between Sherman and the Hills did not create a written agreement establishing the location of the boundary line dividing the parties’ parcels of land. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Edward Sherman appeals the judgment of the trial court in favor of Norris and Terry Hill on their counterclaim. On appeal, Sherman claims that the trial court erred in entering judgment in favor of the Hills because the correspondence between Sherman and the Hills did not create a written agreement establishing the location of the boundary line dividing the parties’ parcels of land. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Sherman v. Hill, 280 S.W.3d 699, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 129, 2009 WL 230540 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

280 S.W.3d 699 (Sherman v. Hill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.