Case ID: sw3d_129/html/0421-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

James COFFEY and Christianamercy Coffey, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Mark KNOFT, Defendant/Respondent.
    No. ED 83273.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
    March 9, 2004.
    
      George J. Miller, The Miller/Salsbury Law Firm, Eureka, MO, for appellants.
    William F. James, Wuestling & James, L.C., St. Louis, MO, for respondent.
    Before GLENN A. NORTON, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J. and MARY K. HOFF, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs, James Coffey and Christian-amerey Coffey, appeal from the entry of summary judgment in favor of defendant. No error of law appears. A written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no prece-dential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).