Case Name: Walter J. WRIGHT and Wanda L. Wright, Husband and Wife, Individually and as Trustees of the Wanda L. Wright Revocable Trust, Plaintiffs/Respondents, v. Kenneth M. SIDES, Deceased, Shirley Sides, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Kenneth M. Sides, Defendant/Appellant, and Patricia Lewis, Robert Sides, and Heather Dilworth, Defendants
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-02-13
Citations: 391 S.W.3d 911
Docket Number: No. ED 98158
Parties: Walter J. WRIGHT and Wanda L. Wright, Husband and Wife, Individually and as Trustees of the Wanda L. Wright Revocable Trust, Plaintiffs/Respondents, v. Kenneth M. SIDES, Deceased, Shirley Sides, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Kenneth M. Sides, Defendant/Appellant, and Patricia Lewis, Robert Sides, and Heather Dilworth, Defendants.
Judges: Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J„ and LISA VAN AMBURG, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 391
Pages: 911–912

Head Matter:
Walter J. WRIGHT and Wanda L. Wright, Husband and Wife, Individually and as Trustees of the Wanda L. Wright Revocable Trust, Plaintiffs/Respondents, v. Kenneth M. SIDES, Deceased, Shirley Sides, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Kenneth M. Sides, Defendant/Appellant, and Patricia Lewis, Robert Sides, and Heather Dilworth, Defendants.
No. ED 98158.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Feb. 13, 2013.
Shirley Sides, Desoto, Texas, pro se.
Erica Dawn Koetting, O’Loughlin, O’Loughlin & Koetting, L.C., Cape Girar-deau, MO, for Respondents.
Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J„ and LISA VAN AMBURG, J.
. Patricia Lewis, Robert Sides, and Heather Dilworth were not part of this appeal.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Shirley Sides, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Kenneth M. Sides, appeals from the judgment in favor of Walter and Wanda Wright, Individually and as Trustees of the Wanda L. Wright Revocable Trust, on their petition to quiet title. 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).