Case Name: Emmer Hayes RUCKER, et al., Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Lawrence W. ALBERT, Defendant/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2015-10-20
Citations: 472 S.W.3d 653
Docket Number: No. ED 102556
Parties: Emmer Hayes RUCKER, et al., Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Lawrence W. ALBERT, Defendant/Respondent.
Judges: Before Philip M. Hess, P.J., Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., J. and Angela T. Quigless, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 472
Pages: 653–653

Head Matter:
Emmer Hayes RUCKER, et al., Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Lawrence W. ALBERT, Defendant/Respondent.
No. ED 102556
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.
Filed: October 20, 2015
Steven W. Koslovsky, 7733 Forsyth Blvd, Suite 1100, Clayton, MO. 63105, for appellant.
Joseph L. Racine, Mary M. Albert-Fritz (Co-Counsel), 639 Sunbridge Drive, Chesterfield, MO. 63017, 112 W. Jefferson, # 120, Kirkwood, MO. 63122, for respondent.
Before Philip M. Hess, P.J., Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., J. and Angela T. Quigless, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Emmer Hayes Rucker and Bettie J. Boyd, the surviving widow of Willie R. Boyd, (collectively, "Appellants") appeal the trial court's judgment in'favor of Lawrence N. Albert ("Respondent") following a bench trial. We have reviewed Appellants' brief and the record on appeal, and we find: 1) the trial court did not misapply the law of parol evidence, and 2) the trial court's judgment was not against the weight of the evidence. An extended opinion would have no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Mo. R. Civ. P. 84.16(b) (2015).
. After Willie R, Boyd died on June 30, 2012, the Probate Court determined that Bettie Boyd was the heir of Willie Boyd. In accordance with the Probate Court's Determination of Heirship, the trial court found Bettie Boyd entitled to her respective interest in this action against Respondent.
. Respondent did not file a brief with this Court.