Case Name: MIKE PUCHALLA, INC., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING & EQUIPMENT CO., INC., d/b/a Indeeco, by and through its division, Solitech, a Missouri Corporation, Defendant/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1997-07-29
Citations: 948 S.W.2d 724
Docket Number: No. 71411
Parties: MIKE PUCHALLA, INC., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING & EQUIPMENT CO., INC., d/b/a Indeeco, by and through its division, Solitech, a Missouri Corporation, Defendant/Respondent.
Judges: Before CRANE, P.J. and GERALD M. SMITH and PUDLOWSKI, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 948
Pages: 724–724

Head Matter:
MIKE PUCHALLA, INC., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING & EQUIPMENT CO., INC., d/b/a Indeeco, by and through its division, Solitech, a Missouri Corporation, Defendant/Respondent.
No. 71411.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
July 29, 1997.
Robert L. DeVoto, Robert L. DeVoto, L.C., St. Louis, for Plaintiff/Appellant.
Melanie R. King, David A. Streubel, Gallop, Johnson & Neumann, L.C., St. Louis, for Defendant/Respondent.
Before CRANE, P.J. and GERALD M. SMITH and PUDLOWSKI, JJ.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff appeals from the entry of summary judgment against it in its action to recover commissions from defendant pursuant to a contract. The judgment of the trial court is supported by the essentially uncon-troverted evidence, is in accord with the law, and correctly applies the law. An opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a statement setting forth the basis of our affirmance. Defendant's motion to strike plaintiff's brief is denied.
Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).