Case Name: E.C. & Charles Harter, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Lloyd MIESNER, Defendant/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1996-05-21
Citations: 922 S.W.2d 440
Docket Number: No. 68786
Parties: E.C. & Charles Harter, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Lloyd MIESNER, Defendant/Respondent.
Judges: Before GERARD M. SMITH, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and RHODES RUSSELL, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 922
Pages: 440–440

Head Matter:
E.C. & Charles Harter, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Lloyd MIESNER, Defendant/Respondent.
No. 68786.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
May 21, 1996.
Charles A. Harter, Washington, for appellants.
Steven P. Kuenzel, Eekelkamp, Eckel-kamp, Wood & Kuenzel, Washington, for respondent.
Before GERARD M. SMITH, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and RHODES RUSSELL, JJ.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM DECISION
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiffs appeal from the entry of judgment for defendant in a small claim trial de novo concerning an automobile collision. The trial court acted within its discretion in refusing to allow a rebuttal witness to testify. Plaintiffs' other claims of error all involve questions of credibility, for which we defer to the trial court. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a statement of the reasons for the Court's decision.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).