Case Name: Randall ESROCK, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. C & M BAIL BONDS, INC., and Cody Ice, Defendants/Appellants
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1996-10-15
Citations: 930 S.W.2d 532
Docket Number: No. 68766
Parties: Randall ESROCK, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. C & M BAIL BONDS, INC., and Cody Ice, Defendants/Appellants.
Judges: Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 930
Pages: 532–532

Head Matter:
Randall ESROCK, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. C & M BAIL BONDS, INC., and Cody Ice, Defendants/Appellants.
No. 68766.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Oct. 15, 1996.
Gregg T. Hyder, Columbia, for defendants/appellants.
Mark D. Hirsehfeld, Clayton, for plain-tifffrespondent.
Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Defendants appeal the judgment for plaintiff in an action for breach of a criminal bail bond agreement following a bench trial. We affirm. The judgment of the trial court is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence; no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).