Case Name: STATE of Missouri ex rel., James LOVINGS, Fred Haunold and Daniel Bell, Respondents, v. CITY OF DELLWOOD, et al., Appellants
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-02-14
Citations: 436 S.W.3d 219
Docket Number: No. ED 99521
Parties: STATE of Missouri ex rel., James LOVINGS, Fred Haunold and Daniel Bell, Respondents, v. CITY OF DELLWOOD, et al., Appellants.
Judges: Before GARY M. GAERTNER, JR., C.J., GLENN A. NORTON, J., and ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 436
Pages: 219–219

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri ex rel., James LOVINGS, Fred Haunold and Daniel Bell, Respondents, v. CITY OF DELLWOOD, et al., Appellants.
No. ED 99521.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.
Feb. 14, 2013.
Donnell Smith, St. Louis, MO, for City of Dellwood and Defendant Loretta Johnson.
Cindy Reeds Ormsby, Clayton, MO, for Defendant, St. Louis County Board of Election Commissioners.
Stephanie E. Karr, Clayton, MO, for respondents.
Before GARY M. GAERTNER, JR., C.J., GLENN A. NORTON, J., and ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
The City of Dellwood, Loretta Johnson, and the St. Louis County Board of Election Commissioners (collectively "Dell-wood"), appeal the judgment of the trial court on James Lovings, Fred Haunold, and Daniel Bell's (collectively "Plaintiffs") petition for writ of mandamus. Plaintiffs filed the action against Dellwood seeking a writ of mandamus ordering Dellwood to certify them as candidates for municipal office and ensure their names appear on the ballot on April 2, 2013. Dellwood appeals the judgment of the trial court in favor of Plaintiffs on their petition. 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. We affirm.
An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).