Case Name: William GRAY, et al., Plaintiffs/Respondents, v. Tim WHITE, Defendant/Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2008-11-12
Citations: 280 S.W.3d 89
Docket Number: No. ED 90766
Parties: William GRAY, et al., Plaintiffs/Respondents, v. Tim WHITE, Defendant/Appellant.
Judges: Before Robert G. DOWD, JR., P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J. and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 280
Pages: 89–89

Head Matter:
William GRAY, et al., Plaintiffs/Respondents, v. Tim WHITE, Defendant/Appellant.
No. ED 90766.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
Nov. 12, 2008.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Feb. 27, 2009.
Application for Transfer Denied May 5, 2009.
Kurt D. Breeze, Festus, MO, for plaintiffs/respondents.
Francisco J. Carretero, Saint Louis, MO, for defendant/appellant.
Before Robert G. DOWD, JR., P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J. and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Tim White (Appellant) appeals from the judgment of the trial court granting the City of Festus's (Respondent) Second Motion to Dismiss Amended Counterclaim under the Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity (motion to dismiss) and denying Appellant's Motion for Contempt against Respondent.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court's judgment is supported by substantial evidence. Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo.banc 1976). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).