Case Name: Keith L. BARKET, Appellant, v. LAND CLEARANCE FOR REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF the CITY OF ST. LOUIS, et al., Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2014-03-25
Citations: 436 S.W.3d 598
Docket Number: No. ED 100013
Parties: Keith L. BARKET, Appellant, v. LAND CLEARANCE FOR REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF the CITY OF ST. LOUIS, et al., Respondents.
Judges: Before ROY L. RICHTER, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J., and GLENN A. NORTON, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 436
Pages: 598–599

Head Matter:
Keith L. BARKET, Appellant, v. LAND CLEARANCE FOR REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF the CITY OF ST. LOUIS, et al., Respondents.
No. ED 100013.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
March 25, 2014.
Application for Transfer to Supreme Court Denied April 29, 2014.
Application for Transfer Denied Aug. 19, 2014.
Francis E. Pennington III, Laurie A. Shea, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.
Patricia Hageman, Michael A. Garvin, St. Louis, MO, for Respondent City of St. Louis and Land Clearance for Redevelopment.
Robert F. Epperson, Jr., John J. Reh-mann II, St. Louis, MO, for Respondent Stacy W. Hastie.
Before ROY L. RICHTER, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J., and GLENN A. NORTON, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Keith Barket appeals from the judgment of the trial court dismissing his First Amended Petition based upon the motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim filed by Stacy W. Hastie, Arcade Note, LLC, the City of St. Louis, and Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority of the City of St. Louis. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.
The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).