From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hauser v. Dir. Revenue

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.
Mar 10, 2020
595 S.W.3d 580 (Mo. Ct. App. 2020)

Opinion

No. ED 107816

03-10-2020

Brian HAUSER, Appellant, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, Respondent.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT, Matthew David Fry, ROSENBLUM FRY, P.C., Nathan Theodore Swanson, Co-Counsel, ROSENBLUM, SCHWARTZ, ROGERTS & GLASS, P.C., 120 South Central, Suite 130, St. Louis, MO 63105. ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT, Eric William McDonnell, 301 W. High Street, Jefferson City, MO 65105.


ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT, Matthew David Fry, ROSENBLUM FRY, P.C., Nathan Theodore Swanson, Co-Counsel, ROSENBLUM, SCHWARTZ, ROGERTS & GLASS, P.C., 120 South Central, Suite 130, St. Louis, MO 63105.

ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT, Eric William McDonnell, 301 W. High Street, Jefferson City, MO 65105.

Before Mary K. Hoff, P.J., Sherri B. Sullivan, J., and Angela T. Quigless, J.

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Brian Hauser ("Driver") appeals from the Judgment of the trial court sustaining the revocation of his driving privileges for refusing to submit to a chemical test. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential or precedential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the Judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

Hauser v. Dir. Revenue

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.
Mar 10, 2020
595 S.W.3d 580 (Mo. Ct. App. 2020)
Case details for

Hauser v. Dir. Revenue

Case Details

Full title:Brian HAUSER, Appellant, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, Respondent.

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION THREE.

Date published: Mar 10, 2020

Citations

595 S.W.3d 580 (Mo. Ct. App. 2020)