Case Name: Tamara A. FLEIG and Terrill Smotherman, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Gregory M. BAUR, Jeanette R. Baur and New Era Bank, Defendants/Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2005-01-11
Citations: 155 S.W.3d 770
Docket Number: No. ED 84214
Parties: Tamara A. FLEIG and Terrill Smotherman, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Gregory M. BAUR, Jeanette R. Baur and New Era Bank, Defendants/Respondents.
Judges: Before LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, P.J. and LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN, J. and MARY K. HOFF, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 155
Pages: 770–770

Head Matter:
Tamara A. FLEIG and Terrill Smotherman, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Gregory M. BAUR, Jeanette R. Baur and New Era Bank, Defendants/Respondents.
No. ED 84214.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
Jan. 11, 2005.
John W. Grimm, Limbaugh, Russell, Payne & Howard, Cape Girardeau, MO, for Appellant.
William G. Reeves, Farmington, MO, attorney for separate New Era Bank.
David L. Mayhugh, Park Hills, MO, attorney for Gregory and Jeanette Baur.
Before LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, P.J. and LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN, J. and MARY K. HOFF, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Tamara A. Fleig and Terrill Smother-man (Plaintiffs) appeal the trial court's entry of judgment against them upon the granting of a motion for judgment made by Gregory M. Baur, Jeanette R. Baur, (the Baurs) and New Era Bank at the conclusion of Plaintiffs' case in the non-jury trial of Plaintiffs' action to set aside a deed between the Baurs and Donald Smotherman (Grantor) based on undue influence and mental incapacity.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claims of error to be without merit. The judgment of the trial court is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
The parties have been furnished with a memorandum, for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).