Case Name: Effie WEIBERT, et al., Plaintiffs/Respondents/Cross-Appellants, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., Defendant/Appellant/Cross-Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1998-09-15
Citations: 980 S.W.2d 59
Docket Number: Nos. 73382, 73383
Parties: Effie WEIBERT, et al., Plaintiffs/Respondents/Cross-Appellants, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., Defendant/Appellant/Cross-Respondent.
Judges: Before JAMES R. DOWD, P.J., and CRAHAN and RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 980
Pages: 59–59

Head Matter:
Effie WEIBERT, et al., Plaintiffs/Respondents/Cross-Appellants, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., Defendant/Appellant/Cross-Respondent.
Nos. 73382, 73383.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Sept. 15, 1998.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Nov. 6,1998.
Application for Transfer Denied Dee. 22, 1998.
Evans & Dixon, Jeffrey K. Suess, Adrian P. Sulser, Todd L. Beekley, St. Louis, for appellants.
David 0. Danis, T. Evan Schaeffer, Craig J. Coneannon, St. Louis, for respondent.
Before JAMES R. DOWD, P.J., and CRAHAN and RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals the judgment entered on a jury verdict arising out of Plaintiffs fall in Defendant's parking lot. Plaintiffs cross-appeal the trial court's reduction of the judgment due to the jury's finding that Plaintiff was comparatively at fault. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b), with costs assessed to Defendant.