Case ID: sw3d_400/html/0864-01.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

Jaynee WILL, Plaintiff/Respondent, and Scott Will, Plaintiff, v. PEPOSE VISION INSTITUTE, P.C., Defendant/Appellant.
    No. ED 97910.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
    June 11, 2013.
    Teresa Young, Angela Pozzo, co-counsel, Philip Willman, co-counsel, Andrew Eastman, co-counsel, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.
    Leonard Cervantes, Jennifer Suttmoel-ler, co-counsel, St. Louis, MO, for Respondent.
    Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J. and LISA S. VAN AMBURG, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Pepose Vision Institute, P.C. appeals from the judgment of the trial court granting Jaynee Will and Scott Will’s motion for new trial.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).