Washington v. Employees Retirement System of St. Louis

Missouri Court of Appeals

Washington v. Employees Retirement System of St. Louis

801 S.W.2d 100, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 1826

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided December 18, 1990·No. No. 58179·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff appeals from a summary judgment granted to defendant on a declaratory judgment action. We affirm. The Findings and Conclusions of the trial court are not clearly erroneous and 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 our order affirming 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.

Plaintiff appeals from a summary judgment granted to defendant on a declaratory judgment action. We affirm. The Findings and Conclusions of the trial court are not clearly erroneous and 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 our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Washington v. Employees Retirement System of St. Louis, 801 S.W.2d 100, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 1826 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

801 S.W.2d 100 (Washington v. Employees Retirement System of St. Louis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.