Case Name: HEMPHILL CONTRACTING COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, CITY OF ST. LOUIS, Defendant/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1991-02-26
Citations: 810 S.W.2d 517
Docket Number: No. 57983
Parties: HEMPHILL CONTRACTING COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, CITY OF ST. LOUIS, Defendant/Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 810
Pages: 517–518

Head Matter:
HEMPHILL CONTRACTING COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, CITY OF ST. LOUIS, Defendant/Respondent.
No. 57983.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Feb. 26, 1991.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied May 7, 1991.
Application to Transfer Denied July 23, 1991.
Margaret Bush Wilson, St. Louis, for plaintiff/appellant.
James J. Wilson, David R. Bohm, St. Louis, for defendant/respondent.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff appeals from the trial court's order which found plaintiff did not present sufficient evidence to establish nonconforming use.
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.
The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).