Case Name: Steve GARNER, Appellant, v. Rod REYNOLDS, d/b/a M & N Automotive, LLC and Rod Reynolds, Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-12-10
Citations: 415 S.W.3d 763
Docket Number: No. ED 99899
Parties: Steve GARNER, Appellant, v. Rod REYNOLDS, d/b/a M & N Automotive, LLC and Rod Reynolds, Respondents.
Judges: Before LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, P.J. and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR. and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 415
Pages: 763–763

Head Matter:
Steve GARNER, Appellant, v. Rod REYNOLDS, d/b/a M & N Automotive, LLC and Rod Reynolds, Respondents.
No. ED 99899.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Dec. 10, 2013.
Jerry L. Suddarth, O’Fallon, MO, for appellant.
William E. Burris, Clayton, MO, for respondent.
Before LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, P.J. and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR. and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Steve Garner appeals from the judgment entered against him on his claims for breach of contract against Rod Reynolds, individually, and Rod Reynolds doing business as M & N Automotive, LLC. Garner contends that the court erred when it set aside the default judgment that had been entered against the defendants as a result of discovery violations, dismissed his petition with prejudice and entered judgment against him after concluding that Garner failed to prove his entitlement to damages. We affirm.
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).