Case Name: James R. ("Jim") RYAN, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. John R. ("Jack") RYAN, et al., Defendants/Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2001-05-22
Citations: 50 S.W.3d 835
Docket Number: No. ED 78697
Parties: James R. (“Jim”) RYAN, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. John R. (“Jack”) RYAN, et al., Defendants/Respondents.
Judges: Before LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, P.J., PAUL J. SIMON, and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 50
Pages: 835–836

Head Matter:
James R. (“Jim”) RYAN, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. John R. (“Jack”) RYAN, et al., Defendants/Respondents.
No. ED 78697.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
May 22, 2001.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 19, 2001.
Application for Transfer Denied Aug. 21, 2001.
Brain A. Bild, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Ira Potter, Attorney for John R. Ryan, Sally Ryan, Ryan Heating Co., St. Louis, MO, for Respondent.
Carl Joseph Pesce, Attorney for Lennox Retail Inc. & RHC Acquisition Company, St. Louis, MO, for Respondent.
Before LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, P.J., PAUL J. SIMON, and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
James R. ("Jim") Ryan (Appellant) appeals from the summary judgment granted by the trial court to John R. ("Jack") Ryan, Sally S. Ryan, John P. Ryan and Ryan Heating Company, Inc., n/k/a/ John Rogers, Inc. (Respondents). We have re viewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that there are no genuine issues of material fact and, based upon our de novo review, that the trial court was correct in entering summary judgment. ITT Commercial Fin. Corp. v. Mid-Am. Marine, 854 S.W.2d 371, 376 (Mo.banc 1993). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only, setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).