Home/Missouri Court of Appeals/SIKMAN v. Toker

SIKMAN v. Toker

269 S.W.3d 46, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1490, 2008 WL 4901744
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedNovember 12, 2008
DocketED 90540
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 269 S.W.3d 46 (SIKMAN v. Toker) 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
SIKMAN v. Toker, 269 S.W.3d 46, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1490, 2008 WL 4901744 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Levent Sikman appeals the judgment entered upon a jury verdict finding in his favor on his claims for unlawful forcible entry and detainer and return of security deposit asserted against Suheyla Toker. 1 We find no error. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties with a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 84.16(b).

1

. Defendant Cenk Toroslu asserted a counterclaim against Sikman for personal injury. Sikman does not challenge that portion of the judgment that was entered upon the jury's finding in favor of Toroslu on his counterclaim.

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

Related

State v. Mansfield
269 S.W.3d 46 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
269 S.W.3d 46, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1490, 2008 WL 4901744, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sikman-v-toker-moctapp-2008.