Case Name: Delyth SCALLION, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Richard TURNER and Todd Mandel, Defendants/Appellants
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1999-12-14
Citations: 11 S.W.3d 752
Docket Number: No. ED 75482
Parties: Delyth SCALLION, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Richard TURNER and Todd Mandel, Defendants/Appellants.
Judges: Before MARY RHODES RUSSELL, C.J., LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN, J., and ROBERT E. CRIST, Sr. J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 11
Pages: 752–753

Head Matter:
Delyth SCALLION, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Richard TURNER and Todd Mandel, Defendants/Appellants.
No. ED 75482.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.
Dec. 14, 1999.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Feb. 7, 2000.
Application for Transfer Denied March 21, 2000.
Leonard W. Buckley, Jr., St. Louis, for appellant.
Joseph L. Green, St. Charles, for respondent.
Before MARY RHODES RUSSELL, C.J., LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN, J., and ROBERT E. CRIST, Sr. J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Richard Turner and Todd Mandel (Defendants) appeal from the judgment entered after a jury found in favor of Delyth Scallion (Plaintiff) in her suit for battery where she alleged they had touched her in inappropriate ways while they employed her as a secretary. On appeal, Defendants argue: (1) the trial court erred in denying their motion for new trial because a juror intentionally failed to disclose a material fact during voir dire; and (2) the trial court erred in allowing the presentation of certain evidence to the jury.
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 precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).