Case Name: Andrew TUGGLE, Appellant, v. Katherine DEAN a/k/a Katherine Coleman and Anthony Bryant a/k/a Tony L. Bryant, Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2005-01-11
Citations: 155 S.W.3d 774
Docket Number: No. ED 84441
Parties: Andrew TUGGLE, Appellant, v. Katherine DEAN a/k/a Katherine Coleman and Anthony Bryant a/k/a Tony L. Bryant, 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: 155
Pages: 774–775

Head Matter:
Andrew TUGGLE, Appellant, v. Katherine DEAN a/k/a Katherine Coleman and Anthony Bryant a/k/a Tony L. Bryant, Respondents.
No. ED 84441.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Jan. 11, 2005.
Adrienne L. Schaffer-James, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Richard B. Dempsey, Jr., St. Louis, MO, for respondents.
Before GARY M. GAERTNER, SR., P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and BOOKER T. SHAW, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Andrew Tuggle ("Tuggle") appeals from the trial court's judgment dismissing his petition in equity seeking the establishment of non-paternity of J.T., a minor child, as being barred by res judicata. In his one point on appeal, Tuggle argues the trial court erred in dismissing his petition because it was not barred by res judicata because the identity of the parties and the identity of the issues are different.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file. The trial court did not err in dismissing Tuggle's petition. Nazeri v. Missouri Valley College, 860 S.W.2d 303, 306 (Mo. banc 1993). An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. 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'.14(b).