Case Name: Aaron SEARCY, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-04-16
Citations: 397 S.W.3d 34
Docket Number: No. ED 98132
Parties: Aaron SEARCY, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Respondent.
Judges: Before ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., P.J., ROY L. RICHTER, J. and ANGELA T. QUIGLESS, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 397
Pages: 34–35

Head Matter:
Aaron SEARCY, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Respondent.
No. ED 98132.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
April 16, 2013.
James J. Simeri, Clayton, MO, for appellant.
Jeffrey J. Brinker, Clayton, MO, for respondent.
Before ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., P.J., ROY L. RICHTER, J. and ANGELA T. QUIGLESS, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Aaron Searcy (Searcy) appeals the trial court's judgment in favor of State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (State Farm) after a jury verdict. Searcy raises two points on appeal. In his first point, Searcy contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss State Farm's affirmative defense based on material misrepresentation because State Farm did not properly plead the required elements. In his second point, Searcy alleges the trial court erred in giving the jury an instruction on State Farm's affirmative defense based on material misrepresentation. Se-arcy contends the instruction was not supported by the evidence as State Farm offered no evidence that it was prejudiced by a material misrepresentation. We find no error and affirm.
An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment of the motion court pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).