Sellers further alleged that the City of Des Peres never approved the sale of the property to buyer and the City of Des Peres physically razed the house. Buyer filed his answer and a counter-claim against sellers. Buyer filed a motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, to make count II more definite and certain. Buyer filed another motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, to make more definite and certain. The motion was denied by the trial court on October 28, 1997.
Sellers raise one point on appeal.
In their sole point, sellers argue the trial court erred in dismissing their count II of the second amended petition with prejudice. When the trial court does not state its basis for dismissal, we presume it was based on the grounds stated in the motion to dismiss. We will affirm the judgment of dismissal, if it can be sustained on any ground supported by the motion to dismiss. Id. Sellers in their second amended petition alleged they were damaged because buyer refused to accept the return of the earnest money deposit and failed to honor the terms and conditions of the escrow agreement. Sellers alleged they were damaged because they were not able to close on the property, and they incurred monthly mortgage payments and attorneys' fees.