Snelling v. Rutherford

Missouri Court of Appeals

Snelling v. Rutherford

458 S.W.3d 837, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 308, 2015 WL 1383949

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 24, 2015·No. No. ED 101824·Published

Opinion

[838] ORDER

PER CURIAM

Lonnie Snelling (“Snelling”) appeals from a judgment dismissing his petition for failing to obtain proper service upon the named defendants and for failing to provide competent evidence in support of his claim for damages.

We have reviewed Snelling’s brief and the record on appeal. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, we have furnished the parties with a memorandum decision, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for our order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

[838] ORDER

PER CURIAM

Lonnie Snelling (“Snelling”) appeals from a judgment dismissing his petition for failing to obtain proper service upon the named defendants and for failing to provide competent evidence in support of his claim for damages.

We have reviewed Snelling’s brief and the record on appeal. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, we have furnished the parties with a memorandum decision, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for our order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Snelling v. Rutherford, 458 S.W.3d 837, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 308, 2015 WL 1383949 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

458 S.W.3d 837 (Snelling v. Rutherford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.