Case Name: The PADBERG LAW FIRM, Respondent, v. Gina McWILLIAMS, et al., Appellants
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-11-19
Citations: 413 S.W.3d 732
Docket Number: No. ED 98921
Parties: The PADBERG LAW FIRM, Respondent, v. Gina McWILLIAMS, et al., Appellants.
Judges: Before ROY L. RICHTER, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J., and ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, C.J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 413
Pages: 732–733

Head Matter:
The PADBERG LAW FIRM, Respondent, v. Gina McWILLIAMS, et al., Appellants.
No. ED 98921.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Nov. 19, 2013.
Henry P. Elster, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.
Roberts, Wooten & Zimmer, L.L.C., Kevin C. Roberts, Hillsboro, MO, for Respondent.
Before ROY L. RICHTER, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, J., and ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, C.J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Appellants/Defendants, Gina McWil-liams, Alicia McWilliams, Logan McWil-liams and Trevor McWilliams, appeal from the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Respondent/Plaintiff, The Padberg Law Firm, on The Padberg Law Firm's petition for declaratory judgment. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.
The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).