Case Name: RICH GULLET & SONS, INC., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. GULLET CONTRACTING, LLC, and Raymond M. Gullet, Defendants/Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-02-19
Citations: 395 S.W.3d 599
Docket Number: No. ED 98143
Parties: RICH GULLET & SONS, INC., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. GULLET CONTRACTING, LLC, and Raymond M. Gullet, Defendants/Respondents.
Judges: Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J., and LISA VAN AMBURG, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 395
Pages: 599–600

Head Matter:
RICH GULLET & SONS, INC., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. GULLET CONTRACTING, LLC, and Raymond M. Gullet, Defendants/Respondents.
No. ED 98143.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Feb. 19, 2013.
Application for Transfer to Supreme Court Denied April 30, 2013.
Ted F. Frapolli, Law Office of Ted F. Frapolli Michael A. Gross, Sher Corwin Winters LLC, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Daniel E. Leslie, Leslie, Spieler & Ful-ford LLC, Union, MO, for respondent.
Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J., and LISA VAN AMBURG, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff appeals from a judgment in defendants' favor. The judgment is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence, and does not erroneously declare or apply the law. Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 80 (Mo. banc 1976).
An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.
We affirm pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).