Case Name: ST. LOUIS INVESTMENT PROPERTIES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mary E. RERICHA and The Mary Elisabeth Rericha Trust, Uta, dtd 10/12/84, Mary E. Rericha and Lawrence J. Rericha, trustees, Defendants-Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1998-03-24
Citations: 963 S.W.2d 724
Docket Number: No. 72749
Parties: ST. LOUIS INVESTMENT PROPERTIES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mary E. RERICHA and The Mary Elisabeth Rericha Trust, Uta, dtd 10/12/84, Mary E. Rericha and Lawrence J. Rericha, trustees, Defendants-Respondents.
Judges: Before ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., P.J., and SIMON and HOFF, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 963
Pages: 724–725

Head Matter:
ST. LOUIS INVESTMENT PROPERTIES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mary E. RERICHA and The Mary Elisabeth Rericha Trust, Uta, dtd 10/12/84, Mary E. Rericha and Lawrence J. Rericha, trustees, Defendants-Respondents.
No. 72749.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
March 24, 1998.
Mark B. Leadlove, St. Louis, for appellant.
Charles M. M. Shepherd, St. Louis, for respondent.
Before ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., P.J., and SIMON and HOFF, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
St. Louis Investment Properties, Inc. (Lessee) appeals the trial court's judgment granting a motion for summary judgment filed by Mary E. Rericha (Rericha) and The Mary Elisabeth Rericha Trust (Lessor). In its first point, Lessee argues the trial court erred in finding a lease was properly forfeited by Lessor. In its second point, Lessee argues the trial court erred in finding Lessee was unjustly enriched.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. Upon de novo review, we find no genuine issue of material fact or error of law. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).