Case Name: Diana NEUMAN, Appellant, v. Faisal FARUQI, et al., Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2004-09-28
Citations: 149 S.W.3d 464
Docket Number: No. ED 83632
Parties: Diana NEUMAN, Appellant, v. Faisal FARUQI, et al., Respondent.
Judges: Before PATRICIA L. COHEN, P.J. and KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 149
Pages: 464–465

Head Matter:
Diana NEUMAN, Appellant, v. Faisal FARUQI, et al., Respondent.
No. ED 83632.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Sept. 28, 2004.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Nov. 4, 2004.
Application for Transfer Denied Dec. 21, 2004.
James W. Schottel, Jr., St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.
Laura Gerdes Bub, Clayton, MO, Jerry R. Wilding, St. Louis, MO, for Respondents.
Before PATRICIA L. COHEN, P.J. and KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
In this consolidated appeal, Diana Neu-man (Neuman) appeals from the judgment granting Ralston Purina Company (Ral-ston) its Motion for Summary Judgment. Neuman also appeals from a judgment granting Faisal Faruqi (Faruqi) his Motion for Sanctions and awarding sanctions against Neuman in the amount of $5,000. On appeal, Neuman argues the trial court (1) erred in granting Ralston's motion for summary judgment because a duty existed with respect to Neuman's negligent super vision claim against Ralston, (2) erred in granting Ralston's motion for summary judgment because Neuman sufficiently presented a prima facie case of negligent supervision against Ralston, and (3) abused its discretion in awarding monetary sanctions against Neuman in the amount of $5,000. We affirm.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. 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).