Case Name: John T. SCHWENT, Appellant, v. PURCELL TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-11-12
Citations: 413 S.W.3d 391
Docket Number: No. ED 99211
Parties: John T. SCHWENT, Appellant, v. PURCELL TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Respondent.
Judges: Before ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, C.J., ANGELA T. QUIGLESS, J., and LISA VAN AMBURG, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 413
Pages: 391–391

Head Matter:
John T. SCHWENT, Appellant, v. PURCELL TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Respondent.
No. ED 99211.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.
Nov. 12, 2013.
James P. Faul, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Laura B. Staley, Terry L. Potter, St. Louis, MO, for respondent.
Before ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, C.J., ANGELA T. QUIGLESS, J., and LISA VAN AMBURG, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
John T. Schwent, Jr. (Plaintiff) appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of Washington County in favor of Plaintiffs former employer, Purcell Tire & Rubber Company (Defendant), on Plaintiffs action for breach of contract. Plaintiff argues the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in Defendant's favor because: (1) the court improperly applied the at-will employment doctrine and ignored the parties' contract; and (2) genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether Defendant breached the contract.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.
We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).