Case Name: 66 DRIVE-IN, INC., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. HYCEL PARTNERS III, L.P., Hycel III, Inc., and Schnuck Markets, Inc., Defendants/Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1995-05-02
Citations: 897 S.W.2d 203
Docket Number: No. 66845
Parties: 66 DRIVE-IN, INC., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. HYCEL PARTNERS III, L.P., Hycel III, Inc., and Schnuck Markets, Inc., Defendants/Respondents.
Judges: Before AHRENS, P.J., GRIMM, C.J., and KAROHL, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 897
Pages: 203–204

Head Matter:
66 DRIVE-IN, INC., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. HYCEL PARTNERS III, L.P., Hycel III, Inc., and Schnuck Markets, Inc., Defendants/Respondents.
No. 66845.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
May 2, 1995.
Daniel T. Rabbitt, Matthew J. Sauter, Rabbitt, Pitzer & Snodgrass, St. Louis, for appellant.
Gerard T. Carmody, Dan M. Lesicko, Bryan Cave, St. Louis, for respondent.
Before AHRENS, P.J., GRIMM, C.J., and KAROHL, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff 66 Drive-In appeals the dismissal of its petition against the guarantors of a development agreement for interest on plaintiffs condemnation award after the developer abandoned the condemnation of plaintiffs land.
No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).