Spear v. Quinn

516 S.W.3d 375, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 174, 2017 WL 977248
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 14, 2017·No. No. ED 103582·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Brian W. Spear and Brian Spear Construction Co. (collectively, “Spear”) appeal from the trial court s Judgment Nunc Pro Tunc awarding Jamie L. Quinn (“Quinn”) damages and attorney’s fees on her counterclaim for unlawful retaliation in violation of the Missouri Human Rights Act (“MHRA”), stemming from Spear’s suit for malicious prosecution and injurious falsehood. No appeal is taken from the judgment denying Spear’s claims. We affirm.1

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Footnotes

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

Spear v. Quinn, 516 S.W.3d 375, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 174, 2017 WL 977248 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

516 S.W.3d 375 (Spear v. Quinn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.