Case Name: Thomas J. KLUTHO, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. The COMPANY CORPORATION, Defendant/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-12-17
Citations: 416 S.W.3d 347
Docket Number: No. ED 99814
Parties: Thomas J. KLUTHO, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. The COMPANY CORPORATION, Defendant/Respondent.
Judges: Before MARY K. HOFF, P. J., KURT S. ODENWALD, J., and ANGELA T. QUIGLESS, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 416
Pages: 347–348

Head Matter:
Thomas J. KLUTHO, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. The COMPANY CORPORATION, Defendant/Respondent.
No. ED 99814.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
Dec. 17, 2013.
David Thrift Butsch, Butsch Roberts & Associates LLC, Clayton, MO, for Appellant.
Christopher Martin- Hohn, Booker T. Shaw, Co-Counsel, Thompson Coburn, St. Louis, MO, for Respondent.
Before MARY K. HOFF, P. J., KURT S. ODENWALD, J., and ANGELA T. QUIGLESS, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Thomas J. Klutho (Klutho) appeals from the trial court's entry of summary judgment in favor of The Company Corporation (TCC) on Klutho's first amended petition. We affirm.
' We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claim of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
. TCC's Motion to Strike Point I of Klutho's Reply Brief is denied.