Opinion
No. ED 110108
08-16-2022
Kurt W. PONZAR and Sandra L. Ponzar, Appellants, v. Matthew LAYFIELD et al., Respondents.
Kurt & Sandra Ponzar, Acting Pro Se, 3209 Mid Rivers Mall Dr., #145, St. Charles, MO 63304, for appellants. Matthew S. Layfield, 100 South Fourth Street Ste 1000, St. Louis, MO 63102, for respondents.
Kurt & Sandra Ponzar, Acting Pro Se, 3209 Mid Rivers Mall Dr., #145, St. Charles, MO 63304, for appellants.
Matthew S. Layfield, 100 South Fourth Street Ste 1000, St. Louis, MO 63102, for respondents.
Before: Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., P.J., John P. Torbitzky, J., and Cristian M. Stevens, J.
ORDER
PER CURIAM. Kurt and Sandra Ponzar appeal the circuit court's summary judgment in favor of Matthew Layfield, Michelle L. Clardy, Sherry Dreisewerd, Michael Campbell and Polsinelli Shughart, PC ("Defendants"). The circuit court did not err in granting summary judgment on the Ponzars’ abuse of process claim because the undisputed facts negate the first element of that claim. The motion for summary judgment also provided a legal reason why the Ponzars were not entitled to relief for malicious prosecution, as they claimed was also pleaded in the petition, and therefore the circuit court did not err in ruling on that claim. We affirm.
An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. 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).