Case ID: sw3d_209/html/0528-02.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

Amir ALIBEGOVIC and Tanja Redzonic, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs/Respondents, v. PRIME TV, L.L.C., Defendant, and Directv, Inc., d/b/a Directv, Defendant/Appellant.
    No. ED 88040.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
    Dec. 26, 2006.
    John S. Steward, Burstein Law Firm, P.C., Clayton, MO, for respondents.
    
      David M. Harris, John L. Ross, Kirsten M. Ahmad, Greensfelder, Hemker & Gale, P.C., St. Louis, MO, Michael E. Williams, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for appellant.
    Before ROY L. RICHTER, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J. and MARY K. HOFF, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment that denied a motion to compel arbitration. The trial court’s judgment is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976).

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a written memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).