Case ID: sw3d_413/html/0732-02.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

The PADBERG LAW FIRM, Respondent, v. Gina McWILLIAMS, et al., Appellants.
    No. ED 98921.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    Nov. 19, 2013.
    Henry P. Elster, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.
    Roberts, Wooten & Zimmer, L.L.C., Kevin C. Roberts, Hillsboro, MO, for Respondent.
    Before ROY L. RICHTER, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J., and ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, C.J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellants/Defendants, Gina McWil-liams, Alicia McWilliams, Logan McWil-liams and Trevor McWilliams, appeal from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Respondent/Plaintiff, The Padberg Law Firm, on The Padberg Law Firm’s petition for declaratory judgment. 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 for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).