Case ID: sw2d_999/html/0259-01.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

CROMER MOTORS, INC. and Gregory Cromer, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Gregory A. WITENGIER and J. Lee Witengier, Defendants/Respondents.
    No. 75500.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
    Aug. 3, 1999.
    James C. Ochs, St. Louis, for appellants.
    Jack F. Allen, Clayton, for respondents.
    Before PAUL J. SIMON, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J., and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs appeal from the trial court’s entry of summary judgment in defendants’ favor on plaintiffs’ malicious prosecution action. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the facts and restating the principles of law would have no prece-dential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

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