Case Name: James MING, Appellant/Plaintiff, v. Joseph H.D. LEE, Respondent/Defendant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2001-10-09
Citations: 58 S.W.3d 62
Docket Number: No. ED 79124
Parties: James MING, Appellant/Plaintiff, v. Joseph H.D. LEE, Respondent/Defendant.
Judges: Before WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, Jr., P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J. and ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 58
Pages: 62–62

Head Matter:
James MING, Appellant/Plaintiff, v. Joseph H.D. LEE, Respondent/Defendant.
No. ED 79124.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Oct. 9, 2001.
Isidore I. Lamke, Washington, MO, for appellant.
James Mondl & James Hacking, III St. Louis, MO, for respondent.
Before WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, Jr., P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J. and ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff, James Ming, appeals from the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant, Joseph H.D. Lee, in a breach of contract action.
We have reviewed the record on appeal. No error of law appears. An opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).