Case Name: John D. BAILEY, D.O., Appellant, v. Dennis J. ABERNATHIE, et al, R. Ray Cunningham, Robert W. Gaines, Thomas R. Highland, Joel T. Jeffries, John T. Oro, Randal R. Trecha, Curators of the University of Missouri, Columbia Orthopedic Group, Llp., Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2004-12-21
Citations: 157 S.W.3d 725
Docket Number: No. WD 64070
Parties: John D. BAILEY, D.O., Appellant, v. Dennis J. ABERNATHIE, et al, R. Ray Cunningham, Robert W. Gaines, Thomas R. Highland, Joel T. Jeffries, John T. Oro, Randal R. Trecha, Curators of the University of Missouri, Columbia Orthopedic Group, Llp., Respondents.
Judges: Before HARDWICK, P.J., ULRICH and NEWTON, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 157
Pages: 725–726

Head Matter:
John D. BAILEY, D.O., Appellant, v. Dennis J. ABERNATHIE, et al, R. Ray Cunningham, Robert W. Gaines, Thomas R. Highland, Joel T. Jeffries, John T. Oro, Randal R. Trecha, Curators of the University of Missouri, Columbia Orthopedic Group, Llp., Respondents.
No. WD 64070.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Dec. 21, 2004.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Feb. 1, 2005.
Application for Transfer Denied April 5, 2005.
Seth D. Shumaker, Esq., Kirksville, MO, Audrey H. McIntosh, Esq., Jefferson City, MO, for Appellant.
Jeffrey O. Parshall, Esq., Susan F. Robertson, Esq., Columbia, MO, for Respondent Robert Cunningham and Randal Tre-cha.
Glen R. Ehrhardt, Esq., Columbia, MO, for Respondent Thomas Highland, Columbia Orthopedic Group, Lip, and Joel Jef-fries.
William F. Arnet, Esq., Katharine S. Bunn, Esq., Columbia, MO, for Respondent Curators of the University of Missouri, Robert Gaines and John Oro.
Before HARDWICK, P.J., ULRICH and NEWTON, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
John Bailey appeals from the entry of summary judgment on his breach of contract claim. Upon review of the record, we find no error and affirm the trial court's judgment. Because a published opinion would have no jurisprudential value, we have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision.
Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).