Case Name: Doris HALEY, as Next Friend, FOR Marcus HALEY, Appellant, v. Steve COOK, Individually, and d/b/a Pizza Hut Hut Hut Team Camp, Respondent.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2018-07-17
Citations: 560 S.W.3d 1
Docket Number: WD 80838
Parties: Doris HALEY, as Next Friend, FOR Marcus HALEY, Appellant,
v.
Steve COOK, Individually, and d/b/a Pizza Hut Hut Hut Team Camp, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 560
Pages: 1–2

Head Matter:
Doris HALEY, as Next Friend, FOR Marcus HALEY, Appellant,
v.
Steve COOK, Individually, and d/b/a Pizza Hut Hut Hut Team Camp, Respondent.
WD 80838
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Filed: July 17, 2018
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied August 28, 2018
Application for Transfer Denied December 4, 2018
Thurlow D. Schauffler, Columbia for appellant
Johnathon C. Brereton-Hubbard, St. Louis for respondent
Before Special Division: Zel M. Fischer, P.J., and Alok Ahuja and Karen King Mitchell, JJ.
ORDER

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Plaintiff-Appellant Doris Haley, as next friend for her son Marcus Haley, appeals the Circuit Court of Saline County's grant of summary judgment to Defendant-Respondent Steve Cook (individually and doing business as Pizza Hut Hut Hut Team Camp). In her lawsuit, Doris Haley sought damages for injuries which Marcus Haley suffered during a summer football camp which was organized by Cook. On appeal, Doris Haley argues that the circuit court erroneously granted summary judgment to Cook, because genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether Cook had breached a duty owed to Marcus Haley by failing to have qualified referees officiating at the camp's scrimmages; whether Cook's breach of duty proximately caused Marcus Haley's injuries; and whether Marcus Haley had assumed the risk of injury associated with participation in the football camp. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, an unpublished memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order has been provided to the parties. Rule 84.16(b).