Case Name: STATE of Missouri, ex rel. EMPLOYEES OF RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS, et al., Appellants, v. BOARD OF ESTIMATE & APPORTIONMENT OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS, et al., Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2001-05-01
Citations: 43 S.W.3d 887
Docket Number: No. ED 78316
Parties: STATE of Missouri, ex rel. EMPLOYEES OF RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS, et al., Appellants, v. BOARD OF ESTIMATE & APPORTIONMENT OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS, et al., Respondents.
Judges: Before ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., P.J., MARY RHODES RUSSELL and RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 43
Pages: 887–888

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, ex rel. EMPLOYEES OF RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS, et al., Appellants, v. BOARD OF ESTIMATE & APPORTIONMENT OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS, et al., Respondents.
No. ED 78316.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
May 1, 2001.
Michael C. Arnold, Yonke, Arnold, New-bold, Winter & Jacoby, P.C., Kansas City, MO, for appellants.
Edward J. Hanlon, City Counselor, Mark Lawson, Associate City Counselor, St. Louis, MO, for respondents.
Before ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., P.J., MARY RHODES RUSSELL and RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Members of the Board of Trustees of the Employees Retirement System of the City of St. Louis ("Appellants") appeal the denial of their Petition in Mandamus. Appellants contend that the Board of Estimate and Apportionment ("Respondents") was under a ministerial duty to include a contribution to the retirement system for fiscal year 2001.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).