Case Name: Scott UHRIG, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. THE CITY OF ARNOLD, Missouri, Defendant/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2002-05-28
Citations: 77 S.W.3d 668
Docket Number: No. ED 79990
Parties: Scott UHRIG, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. THE CITY OF ARNOLD, Missouri, Defendant/Respondent.
Judges: Before WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, JR., P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J. and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 77
Pages: 668–669

Head Matter:
Scott UHRIG, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. THE CITY OF ARNOLD, Missouri, Defendant/Respondent.
No. ED 79990.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
May 28, 2002.
Rick Barry, Gregory Kloeppel, Law Offices of Rick Barry, P.C. & The Kloeppel Law Firm, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Robert K. Sweeney, Arnold, MO, for respondent.
Before WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, JR., P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J. and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff, Scott Uhrig, appeals from a judgment of the circuit court affirming the decision of the City of Arnold Police Personnel Board suspending and demoting plaintiff for misconduct on duty.
The Decision and Order of the Arnold Police Personnel Board is supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record. 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 opinion, for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.
We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).