Case ID: sw3d_280/html/0103-01.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

Derrick CAFFEY, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant, v. EQUILON ENTERPRISES, LLC d/b/a Shell Oil Products, US, ASJ Enterprises, Inc., and Amirali S. Jabrani, Defendants/Counterclaimants/Cross-claimants, v. Reinette Saleeby, Crossclaim Defendant/Appellant/Cross-Respondent, and Gregory Fenlon, Cross-claim Defendant/Respondent/Cross-Appellant.
    Nos. ED 90611, ED 90700.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
    Jan. 27, 2009.
    Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied March 10, 2009.
    Application for Transfer Denied May 5, 2009.
    Kevin Hennessey, Chesterfield, MO, for appellant.
    Joseph A. Fenlon, Clayton, MO, for respondent/cross-appellant.
    Before BOOKER T. SHAW, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J., and MARY K. HOFF, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Cross-claim defendants each appeal from a judgment in interpleader allocating attorney’s fees between them. The judgment is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence, and does not erroneously declare or apply the law. Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976).

An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.

We affirm pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Respondent’s alternative motions to dismiss or to strike are denied as moot.