Case ID: sw3d_290/html/0813-02.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

David E. WHISTANCE, Appellant, v. Cary Lyn Diekmann FLICK, Respondent.
    No. WD 69522.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
    July 28, 2009.
    Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Sept. 1, 2009.
    Jeffrey S. Eastman, for Appellant.
    Christopher F. Arbuckle, for Respondent.
    Before Division Two: VICTOR C. HOWARD, P.J., JOSEPH M. ELLIS, Judge and MARK D. PFEIFFER, Judge.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM:

David and Nancy Whistance appeal the trial court’s judgment in favor of Cary Diekmann and against the Whistances on their suit for breach of a real estate contract. On appeal, the Whistances claim that the trial court’s judgment is not supported by the evidence and is against the weight of the evidence. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).