Case Name: Richard STERLING and Meredith Sterling, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. John R. MUNKRES and Elizabeth Munkres, Defendants-Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1999-12-07
Citations: 11 S.W.3d 728
Docket Number: No. ED 75857
Parties: Richard STERLING and Meredith Sterling, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. John R. MUNKRES and Elizabeth Munkres, Defendants-Respondents.
Judges: Before RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, JJ
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 11
Pages: 728–728

Head Matter:
Richard STERLING and Meredith Sterling, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. John R. MUNKRES and Elizabeth Munkres, Defendants-Respondents.
No. ED 75857.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
Dec. 7, 1999.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Feb. 7, 2000.
Application for Transfer Denied March 21, 2000.
Randall D. Sherman, Hillsboro, for appellant.
Floyd T. Norrick, Hillsboro, for respondent.
Before RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, JJ

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Richard and Meredith Sterling appeal the trial court's judgment in favor of John and Elizabeth Munkres in this action for ejectment and to quiet title to real property. We find the judgment is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence, and does not erroneously declare or apply the law. Murphy v. Carrón, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. banc 1976).
An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.
We affirm pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).