BRADDUM v. ROSENBLATT, 882 S.W.2d 732 (Mo.App.E.D. 1994)

TAMARA S. BRADDUM, D/B/A AMERAKORA ENT., PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT, v. LAWRENCE ROSENBLATT, D/B/A L. ROSEN AND ASSOC., DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT, AND BARB AND TREY SCHAFFER, D/B/A MO. SCHOOL OF DOG GROOMING, DEFENDANTS.

No. 65390.Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
August 23, 1994.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ST. LOUIS COUNTY; BARBARA ANN CRANCER, JUDGE.

Tamara S. Braddum, party acting pro se.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and CRAHAN, JJ.

Page 733

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

[1] Plaintiff appeals from the circuit court’s dismissal, for failure to prosecute, of her claim against defendant Rosenblatt. We affirm. We have reviewed the record and find the claim of error to be without merit; no error of law appears. 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 affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).