Gill Family Props., LLC v. Keith Smith Mech., LLC, 570 S.W.3d 202 (2019)

March 26, 2019 · Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO · No. ED 106950
570 S.W.3d 202
GILL FAMILY PROPERTIES, LLC, Appellant, v. KEITH SMITH MECHANICAL, LLC, f/k/a Bootheel Mechanical, Respondent.

GILL FAMILY PROPERTIES, LLC, Appellant,
v.
KEITH SMITH MECHANICAL, LLC, f/k/a Bootheel Mechanical, Respondent.

No. ED 106950

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.

Filed: March 26, 2019

FOR APPELLANT: Dustin L. Mayer, Mayer Law Office, 140 South Walnut, Suite B, Dexter, Missouri 63841.

FOR RESPONDENT: Dwight D. Crader, David Crader Attorney at Law, LLC, PO Box 1063, Sikeston, Missouri 63801, John C. Steffens, Lewis Rice, LLC, PO Box 1150, Cape Girardeau, Missouri 63702.

Before Lisa P. Page, C.J., Mary K. Hoff, J. and Philip M. Hess, J.

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Appellant Gill Family Properties, LLC ("Gill" or "Appellant") appeals judgment of the Circuit Court of Cape Girardeau County entered after bench trial on Appellant's petition claiming unjust enrichment and Respondent's counter-claim petition alleging breach of contract and seeking recovery quantum meruit , awarding $40,928.28 to Respondent Keith Smith Mechanical, LLC ("Smith" or "Respondent"). Gill raises one point on appeal, arguing the trial court erred in considering Exhibit KSM-18 and accompanying testimony in assessing damages, because they exceeded the scope of the pleadings and the prayer for relief.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that the trial court did not err. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for use of the parties setting forth the reasons for the decision.

Finding no error, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).1