Case Name: Owen CALDWELL, Timothy Frieberg, Donald Radford, and Kim Shaw, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Kenneth and Linda SHAW, d/b/a "Linny's Kennel", Defendants/Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2005-04-19
Citations: 161 S.W.3d 898
Docket Number: No. ED 84597
Parties: Owen CALDWELL, Timothy Frieberg, Donald Radford, and Kim Shaw, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Kenneth and Linda SHAW, d/b/a “Linny’s Kennel”, Defendants/Respondents.
Judges: Before GARY M. GAERTNER, SR., P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and BOOKER T. SHAW, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 161
Pages: 898–898

Head Matter:
Owen CALDWELL, Timothy Frieberg, Donald Radford, and Kim Shaw, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Kenneth and Linda SHAW, d/b/a “Linny’s Kennel”, Defendants/Respondents.
No. ED 84597.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
April 19, 2005.
Leneigha Sue Lake Downs, Union, MO, for Appellants Owen Caldwell, Kim Shaw, Timothy Frieberg, and Donald Radford.
Mark S. Vincent, Union, MO, for Respondent.
Before GARY M. GAERTNER, SR., P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and BOOKER T. SHAW, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Owen Caldwell, Timothy Frieberg, Donald Radford, and Kim Shaw (Plaintiffs) appeal from the judgment of the trial court denying their request to enjoin Kenneth Shaw and Linda Shaw (Defendants) from operating a dog kenneling and boarding business on Defendants' property. We affirm.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the trial court's judgment is supported by substantial evidence. Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo.banc 1976). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties with a brief memorandum opinion, for them information only, explaining the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).