Case Name: Deborah HICKS, Earslene McDougler, Demerius Hicks, David Hicks, Dia Hicks and Danielle Hicks, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. PRUDENTIAL GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1994-12-06
Citations: 887 S.W.2d 819
Docket Number: No. 65660
Parties: Deborah HICKS, Earslene McDougler, Demerius Hicks, David Hicks, Dia Hicks and Danielle Hicks, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. PRUDENTIAL GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Respondent.
Judges: Before AHRENS, P.J., and SIMON and KAROHL, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 887
Pages: 819–819

Head Matter:
Deborah HICKS, Earslene McDougler, Demerius Hicks, David Hicks, Dia Hicks and Danielle Hicks, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. PRUDENTIAL GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Respondent.
No. 65660.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
Dec. 6, 1994.
Gary A. Mack, Katzman & Crego, Belle-ville, for appellants.
Russell F. Watters, David P. Bub, Brown & James, P.C., St. Louis, for respondent.
Before AHRENS, P.J., and SIMON and KAROHL, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a summary judgment in favor of defendant on plaintiff Deborah Hicks' claim of vexatious refusal to pay. We find that there is no genuine dispute of material fact and that defendant was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. ITT Commercial Finance Corp. v. Mid-America Marine Supply Corp., 854 S.W.2d 371, 381-82[17] (Mo. banc 1993).
An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. A memorandum, solely for the use of the parties involved, has been provided explaining the reasons for our holding.
We affirm the trial court pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).