Whitehead v. Washington University

Missouri Court of Appeals

Whitehead v. Washington University

496 S.W.3d 599, 2016 WL 2894852, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 504

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 17, 2016·No. No. ED 103077·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

In this consolidated appeal, the defendants, Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc., Washington University, and Dr. Steven Hunt, appeal the judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis granting a new trial to the plaintiffs, Kristi and Jonathon Whitehead. Finding no error, we affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. We affirm the trial court’s judgment. Rule 84.16(b)(5).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM

In this consolidated appeal, the defendants, Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc., Washington University, and Dr. Steven Hunt, appeal the judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis granting a new trial to the plaintiffs, Kristi and Jonathon Whitehead. Finding no error, we affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. We affirm the trial court’s judgment. Rule 84.16(b)(5).

Whitehead v. Washington University, 496 S.W.3d 599, 2016 WL 2894852, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 504 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

496 S.W.3d 599 (Whitehead v. Washington University) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.