Case Name: My Quang TRUONG, Appellant, v. COLLECTOR OF REVENUE, City of St. Louis, Missouri, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2001-04-17
Citations: 46 S.W.3d 589
Docket Number: No. ED 78263
Parties: My Quang TRUONG, Appellant, v. COLLECTOR OF REVENUE, City of St. Louis, Missouri, Respondent.
Judges: Before GARY M. GAERTNER, Sr., P.J., LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN, J., and GEORGE W. DRAPER III, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 46
Pages: 589–590

Head Matter:
My Quang TRUONG, Appellant, v. COLLECTOR OF REVENUE, City of St. Louis, Missouri, Respondent.
No. ED 78263.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
April 17, 2001.
Nathan S. Cohen, Eric B. Krauss, Clayton, MO, for appellant.
Anthony J. Sestric, St. Louis, MO, for respondent.
Before GARY M. GAERTNER, Sr., P.J., LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN, J., and GEORGE W. DRAPER III, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
My Quang Truong ("Truong") appeals the judgment of the circuit court denying his Rule 74.06 motion to set aside the tax sale of property previously foreclosed upon by the court at the request of the Collector of Revenue of the City of St. Louis ("Collector"). Truong argues the court abused its discretion in denying the motion be cause Collector did not provide him with adequate notice of the tax sale and subsequent confirmation hearing as required by Collector of Revenue v. Parcels of Land, 585 S.W.2d 486 (Mo. banc 1979). Collector responds that adequate notice was given to Truong in compliance with statutory and due process requirements at the address shown on the records of the St. Louis Assessor.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. A detailed opinion would be of no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties with a brief memorandum opinion, for their information only, explaining the reasons for our decision.
We affirm the judgment and sentence pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).