Hunt v. Sumner Grp., Inc.

Full title: Richard HUNT, Appellant, v. SUMNER GROUP, INC., Respondent.

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

Date published: Feb 27, 2018

541 S.W.3d 13 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018)

Opinion

ED 105692

02-27-2018

Richard HUNT, Appellant, v. SUMNER GROUP, INC., Respondent.

James V. O'Brien, Andrew S. Buchanan, Buchanan & Williams, P.C. Public Defender, 7908 Bonhomme Ave., Ste. 200, Clayton, MO 63105, for Appellant. John J. Gazzoli, Jr., Theresa A. Phelps, Jessica C. Gittemeier, Rosenblum Goldenhersh, P.C., 7733 Forsyth Blvd., Ste. 400, St. Louis, MO 63105, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

James V. O'Brien, Andrew S. Buchanan, Buchanan & Williams, P.C. Public Defender, 7908 Bonhomme Ave., Ste. 200, Clayton, MO 63105, for Appellant.

John J. Gazzoli, Jr., Theresa A. Phelps, Jessica C. Gittemeier, Rosenblum Goldenhersh, P.C., 7733 Forsyth Blvd., Ste. 400, St. Louis, MO 63105, for Respondent.

Before Lisa P. Page, P.J., Roy L. Richter, J., and Philip M. Hess, J.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Richard Hunt ("Hunt") appeals the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Sumner Group, Inc. ("Sumner") on his petition for workers' compensation retaliation pursuant to Section 287.780 RSMo (2000). Each of Hunt's points on appeal contend the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of Sumner because there was sufficient evidence in the record to create a genuine issue of material fact. We affirm.

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 pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).