Opinion
WD 82337
01-21-2020
Tevin GRIMMETT and Lakaila Grimmett, Respondents, v. Juron D. MORRIS, Respondent, Young America Insurance Company, Appellant.
William Price, Jr., Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Appellant. Lynn Hursh, Kansas City, MO, Co-Counsel for Appellant. Kathryn Bascom, Kansas City, MO, Co-Counsel for Appellant. Spencer Eisenmenger, Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Respondent, Tevin Grimmett. Ryan Fowler, Kansas City, MO, Co-Counsel for Respondent, Tevin Grimmett. Robert Norfleet, Kansas City, MO, Co-Counsel for Respondent, Tevin Grimmett. Thomas Hershewe, Kansas City, MO, Co-Counsel for Respondent, Tevin Grimmett. Ryan Watson, Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Respondent, Lakaila Grimmett. Thomas Hershewe, Kansas City, MO, Co-Counsel for Respondent, Lakaila Grimmett. Samuel Wendt, Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Respondent, Juron Morris.
William Price, Jr., Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Appellant.
Lynn Hursh, Kansas City, MO, Co-Counsel for Appellant.
Kathryn Bascom, Kansas City, MO, Co-Counsel for Appellant.
Spencer Eisenmenger, Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Respondent, Tevin Grimmett.
Ryan Fowler, Kansas City, MO, Co-Counsel for Respondent, Tevin Grimmett.
Robert Norfleet, Kansas City, MO, Co-Counsel for Respondent, Tevin Grimmett.
Thomas Hershewe, Kansas City, MO, Co-Counsel for Respondent, Tevin Grimmett.
Ryan Watson, Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Respondent, Lakaila Grimmett.
Thomas Hershewe, Kansas City, MO, Co-Counsel for Respondent, Lakaila Grimmett.
Samuel Wendt, Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Respondent, Juron Morris.
Before Division Two: Thomas H. Newton, P.J., Mark D. Pfeiffer, and Thomas N. Chapman, JJ.
ORDER
Per Curiam: Young America Insurance Company appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of Jackson County, confirming arbitration awards entered in favor of Lakaila Grimmett and Tevin Grimmett against Young America’s potential insured, Juron Morris. Young America argues that the circuit court was required to vacate the awards because it was not provided notice of the arbitration or an opportunity to intervene in the arbitration; the judgment confirming the awards deprived it of its constitutional rights to due process and access to the courts; and the arbitration did not comply with the requirements of the Missouri Uniform Arbitration Act. Finding no error, we affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential import, we have provided the parties an unpublished memorandum of law. Rule 84.16(b).