Case Name: Jene WEINSTEIN, by and through her Next Friend, Jack WEINSTEIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONSULTANT'S IN WOMEN'S HEALTH CARE, INC., and David L. Weinstein, M.D., Defendants-Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1999-09-21
Citations: 2 S.W.3d 844
Docket Number: No. ED 74853
Parties: Jene WEINSTEIN, by and through her Next Friend, Jack WEINSTEIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONSULTANT’S IN WOMEN’S HEALTH CARE, INC., and David L. Weinstein, M.D., Defendants-Respondents.
Judges: Before PAUL J. SIMON, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 2
Pages: 844–845

Head Matter:
Jene WEINSTEIN, by and through her Next Friend, Jack WEINSTEIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONSULTANT’S IN WOMEN’S HEALTH CARE, INC., and David L. Weinstein, M.D., Defendants-Respondents.
No. ED 74853.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
Sept. 21, 1999.
David Arthur Boresi, St. Louis, for appellant.
Kenneth W. Bean, Thomas J. Palazzolo, St. Louis, for respondent.
Before PAUL J. SIMON, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff appeals from a judgment entered on a jury verdict apportioning no fault to Defendants Consultants in Women's Healthcare, Inc., and David Wein-stein, M.D., in a medical malpractice case. The evidence in support of the jury verdict is not insufficient. No error of law appears.
An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion, for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.
Plaintiffs Motion to Strike Footnote Two of Respondent's Brief is granted and Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Supple mental Legal File is denied. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b)(3).