Case Name: Ethel R. GROVES, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., Defendant/Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1999-12-14
Citations: 11 S.W.3d 753
Docket Number: No. ED 75711
Parties: Ethel R. GROVES, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., Defendant/Appellant.
Judges: Before WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, Jr., P.J. and MARY K. HOFF, J. and JAMES A. PUDLOWSKI, S.J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 11
Pages: 753–754

Head Matter:
Ethel R. GROVES, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., Defendant/Appellant.
No. ED 75711.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
Dec. 14, 1999.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Feb. 7, 2000.
Application for Transfer Denied March 21, 2000.
Jeffry S. Thomsen, Cynthia Hamilton, Evans & Dixon, St. Louis, for appellant.
Robert V. Krueger, Van Matre & Krueger, Mexico, for respondent.
Before WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, Jr., P.J. and MARY K. HOFF, J. and JAMES A. PUDLOWSKI, S.J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. appeals from the trial's court judgment entered in favor of Ethel Groves in a personal injury action.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claims of error to be without merit. The evidence supporting the jury verdict is not insufficient. No error of law appears. A written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no prece-dential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.
We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).