Case Name: Alan M. POLITTE, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD, Defendant/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-03-26
Citations: 436 S.W.3d 219
Docket Number: No. ED 97854
Parties: Alan M. POLITTE, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD, Defendant/Respondent.
Judges: Before ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., P.J., ROY L. RICHTER, J., and ANGELA T. QUIGLESS, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 436
Pages: 219–220

Head Matter:
Alan M. POLITTE, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD, Defendant/Respondent.
No. ED 97854.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
March 26, 2013.
Fritz G. Faerber, Christine E. Anderson, Co-Counsel, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Thomas E. Jones, Harlan A. Haría, Co-Counsel, Belleville, IL, for respondent.
Before ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., P.J., ROY L. RICHTER, J., and ANGELA T. QUIGLESS, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Alan Politte (Plaintiff) appeals from the judgment of the trial court, entered pursuant to a jury verdict, in favor of Union Pacific Railroad (Railroad) in an action under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA), 45 U.S.C. Sections 51 et seq. which alleged Plaintiff was injured while making a repair as a machinist for Railroad. Plaintiff asserts five points on appeal. Two of his points claim the trial court erred in its admission or exclusion of evidence. Plaintiffs remaining points claim instructional error. 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 reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).