Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

34 S.W.3d 245

Axtman v. Holley

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 12, 2000

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 2000-12-12

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently March 2014

2 federal appellate ·

Relies on Murphy v. Carron

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2000-12-12

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2Matthew Axtman appeals from the trial court’s judgment of a directed verdict in favor of Jean Holley and Matthew Zimmerman on his claims arising from a dog bite.

¶3We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. The judgment is supported by substantial and competent evidence in the record and is not against the weight of the evidence. Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision.

¶4We affirm the judgment of the trial court pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

/34/sw3d/245 · .json · Public domain