St. Louis Bank v. Hilbert

Missouri Court of Appeals

St. Louis Bank v. Hilbert

383 S.W.3d 492, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1415, 2012 WL 5493298

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 13, 2012·No. No. ED 97782·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Michael C. Hilbert, James D. Crews, and Melinda Crews (“Defendants”), appeal from the trial court’s entry of a default judgment in favor of St. Louis Bank. The Defendants contend the trial court erred in failing to set aside the default judgments against them on the fraud count.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. 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.

Michael C. Hilbert, James D. Crews, and Melinda Crews (“Defendants”), appeal from the trial court’s entry of a default judgment in favor of St. Louis Bank. The Defendants contend the trial court erred in failing to set aside the default judgments against them on the fraud count.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. 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).

St. Louis Bank v. Hilbert, 383 S.W.3d 492, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1415, 2012 WL 5493298 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

383 S.W.3d 492 (St. Louis Bank v. Hilbert) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.