Smith v. Reconditioned Appliances

Missouri Court of Appeals

Smith v. Reconditioned Appliances

530 S.W.3d 613

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 17, 2017·No. ED 105433·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

After a bench trial, Noah Smith appeals the judgment in his favor awarding $500 in damages against Reconditioned Appliances. Appellant contests the trial court erred by: (I) improperly applying the wrong measure of damages; (II) failing to award consequential and incidental damages; (III) failing to find Respondent liable for the damage allegedly caused by Respondent; and (IV) failing to submit his cause to a jury. We affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order 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.

After a bench trial, Noah Smith appeals the judgment in his favor awarding $500 in damages against Reconditioned Appliances. Appellant contests the trial court erred by: (I) improperly applying the wrong measure of damages; (II) failing to award consequential and incidental damages; (III) failing to find Respondent liable for the damage allegedly caused by Respondent; and (IV) failing to submit his cause to a jury. We affirm.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Smith v. Reconditioned Appliances, 530 S.W.3d 613 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

530 S.W.3d 613 (Smith v. Reconditioned Appliances) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.