Case Name: The BUSINESS BANK OF SAINT LOUIS, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. BROWN & JAMES, P.C., Defendant/Respondent.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2018-02-13
Citations: 546 S.W.3d 605
Docket Number: ED 105566
Parties: The BUSINESS BANK OF SAINT LOUIS, Plaintiff/Appellant,
v.
BROWN & JAMES, P.C., Defendant/Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 546
Pages: 605–605

Head Matter:
The BUSINESS BANK OF SAINT LOUIS, Plaintiff/Appellant,
v.
BROWN & JAMES, P.C., Defendant/Respondent.
ED 105566
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE.
Filed: February 13, 2018
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied March 22, 2018
Application for Transfer Denied May 22, 2018
John L. Davidson, P.O. Box 31506, St. Louis, MO 63131, For Plaintiff/Appellant.
John L. Gianoulakis, Robert F. Murray, 1 North Brentwood Blvd., Suite 800, Clayton, MO 63105, For Defendant/Appellant.
Before Robert G. Dowd, Jr., P.J., Sherri B. Sullivan, J., and Kurt S. Odenwald, J.
ORDER

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The Business Bank of Saint Louis (Appellant) appeals from the March 27, 2017 Final Judgment of the trial court entering summary judgment in favor of Brown & James, P.C. (Respondent) on Counts I and II of Appellant's Second Amended Petition and dismissing Count III for failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude Respondent was entitled to judgment as a matter of law on Counts I and II, ITT Commercial Fin. Corp. v. Mid-Am. Marine Supply Corp., 854 S.W.2d 371, 376 (Mo. banc 1993) ; and Count III failed to state a claim. Philips v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 430 S.W.3d 324, 329 (Mo. App. E.D. 2014). 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 decision pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).