Case ID: sw3d_181/html/0086-01.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

Sharon GORDON, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Michael BABCOCK, Defendant/Appellant, and Nocturne Enterprises, Inc., et al., Defendants.
    No. ED 85563.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
    Oct. 11, 2005.
    Application for Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Nov. 29, 2005.
    Application for Transfer Denied Jan. 31, 2006.
    Charles W. Gray, St. Charles, MO, for Appellant.
    William Laird Hetlage, Lawrence Gerard Gillespie — co-counsel, Clayton, MO, for Respondent.
    Before NANNETTE A. BAKER, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Michael Babcock (Appellant) appeals from a trial court judgment denying Appellant’s Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Appellant’s Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment because the motion does not state facts constituting a meritorious defense and does not show good cause. Hinton v. Proctor & Schwartz, Inc., 99 S.W.3d 454, 458 (Mo.App. E.D.2003); Rule 74.05(d). 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 the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). 
      
      . All rule references are to Mo. R. Civ. P.2004, unless otherwise indicated.