Peterson v. Medley

Full title: H.L. PETERSON, ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. CHARLES MEDLEY, ET AL., RESPONDENTS

Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five

Date published: Feb 15, 2000

25 S.W.3d 491 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000)

Opinion

No. ED76394

February 15, 2000

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Honorable Robert H. Dierker, Jr.

John J. Allan, 8000 Maryland #1000, Clayton, MO 63105, Attorney for Appellant.

Richard C. Wuestling, Elizabeth G. Roper, 1015 Locust Street, Suite 730, St. Louis, MO 63101, Attorney for Respondent.

Before Mary Rhodes Russell, C.J., Lawrence G. Crahan, J., and Robert E. Crist, Sr.J.

PER CURIAM

ORDER

[2] H.L. Peterson et. al. ("Peterson") appeals from the decision granting Howard Wittner and his firm's, Wittner, Poger and Rosenblum, P.C. ("Wittner"), motion for summary judgment in this action for legal malpractice. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that there is no genuine issue of material fact and Wittner is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. ITT Commercial Finance Corp. v. Mid-America Marine Supply Corp., 854 S.W.2d 371, 376 (Mo.banc 1993). We have, however, provided the parties with a brief memorandum, for their use only, explaining the reason for our decision. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).