Case ID: sw3d_150/html/0131-02.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

Jimmy CHU KO and Josephine Chu Ko, Appellants, v. Randolph TSIEN and Xu L. Tsien, Respondents.
    No. ED 84018.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    Nov. 16, 2004.
    Craig A. Smith, Polsinelli, Shalton, Welte Suelthaus PC, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.
    
      Gary A. Growe, Blumenfeld, Kaplan, & Sandweiss, P.C., St. Louis, MO, for Respondent.
    Before GARY M. GAERTNER, SR., P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J. and BOOKER T. SHAW, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellants, Jimmy Chu Ko and Josephine Chu Ko (“the Chu Kos”), appeal from the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County in favor of respondents, Randolph Tsien and Xu Li Tsien (“the Tsiens”). We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. As an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision.