Welch v. Ford Motor Co.

397 S.W.3d 540, 2013 WL 1736518, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 481
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 23, 2013
DocketNo. ED 98730
StatusPublished

This text of 397 S.W.3d 540 (Welch v. Ford Motor Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Welch v. Ford Motor Co., 397 S.W.3d 540, 2013 WL 1736518, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 481 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Orlando Welch and Charles Joiner.(Appellants) appeal from the trial court’s judgment granting Ford Motor Company’s (Respondent) motion for directed verdict on Appellants’ claim of negligent failure to warn of a manufacturing defect in the ball joint of the lower control arm in Respondent’s 2000 Ford Focus. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that Appellants failed to make a submissible case against Respondent on this claim, and thus the trial court did not err in directing a verdict in Respondent’s favor. Brown v. Hamilton Ins. Co., 956 S.W.2d 417, 419 (Mo.App. E.D.1997). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm thé judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

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

Related

Brown v. Hamilton Insurance
956 S.W.2d 417 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
397 S.W.3d 540, 2013 WL 1736518, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 481, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/welch-v-ford-motor-co-moctapp-2013.