Travelers Indemnity Co. of America v. Shelton Landscape Maintenance, Inc.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Travelers Indemnity Co. of America v. Shelton Landscape Maintenance, Inc.

250 S.W.3d 375, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 100, 2008 WL 170500

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided January 22, 2008·No. ED 89628·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The Travelers Indemnity Company of America (hereinafter, “Insurer”) insured Concord Properties, LLC’s (hereinafter, “Owner”) property. After a fire on the Owner’s insured property, Insurer paid Owner pursuant to the insurance policy. Insurer then brought this action against Shelton Landscape Maintenance, Inc. (hereinafter, “Renter”) for its employee’s negligent and reckless conduct which ignited the fire on Owner’s insured property. Renter moved for summary judgment which the trial court granted. Insurer appeals.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. There is no genuine issue of material fact which would preclude entry of summary judgment. Rule 74.04(c)(3). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The Travelers Indemnity Company of America (hereinafter, “Insurer”) insured Concord Properties, LLC’s (hereinafter, “Owner”) property. After a fire on the Owner’s insured property, Insurer paid Owner pursuant to the insurance policy. Insurer then brought this action against Shelton Landscape Maintenance, Inc. (hereinafter, “Renter”) for its employee’s negligent and reckless conduct which ignited the fire on Owner’s insured property. Renter moved for summary judgment which the trial court granted. Insurer appeals.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. There is no genuine issue of material fact which would preclude entry of summary judgment. Rule 74.04(c)(3). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Travelers Indemnity Co. of America v. Shelton Landscape Maintenance, Inc., 250 S.W.3d 375, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 100, 2008 WL 170500 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

250 S.W.3d 375 (Travelers Indemnity Co. of America v. Shelton Landscape Maintenance, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.