Case Name: Sarah D. SACHTLEBEN, Petitioner/Appellant, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, State of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2004-12-21
Citations: 153 S.W.3d 868
Docket Number: No. ED 84056
Parties: Sarah D. SACHTLEBEN, Petitioner/Appellant, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, State of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before PATRICIA L. COHEN, P.J, KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J., and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 153
Pages: 868–868

Head Matter:
Sarah D. SACHTLEBEN, Petitioner/Appellant, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, State of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
No. ED 84056.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Dec. 21, 2004.
Samuel W. Panos, Chesterfield, MO, for appellant.
Daniel L. Massey, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before PATRICIA L. COHEN, P.J, KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J., and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner, Sarah D. Sachtleben, appeals from the trial court's judgment denying her petition for review of revocation of her driving privilege under Section 577.041 RSMo (2000) after she refused to submit to a chemical test. No error of law appears. A written 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 the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).