James Hitchcock, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. The University News of St. Louis University and Patricia Cummins, Defendants/Respondents.

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court. Opinion Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District Case Style: James Hitchcock, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. The University News of St. Louis University and Patricia Cummins, Defendants/Respondents. Case Number: No. 71068 Handdown Date: 06/10/1997 Appeal From: Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Hon. Thomas C. Mummert II Counsel for Appellant: Counsel for Respondent: Opinion Summary: Citation: Opinion Author: Per Curiam Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED. Before Lawrence G. Crahan, Presiding Judge, Stanley A. Grimm, Judge, and Mary K. Hoff, Judge. Opinion:

ORDER Appellant James Hitchcock appeals the dismissal of his claim of libel against Respondent The University News of St. Louis University. Respondent's motion to dismiss asserted Appellant failed to state a cause of action because: (1) the words alleged to be libelous were not defamatory; (2) the words complained of were expressions of opinion that are privileged from claims of defamation; and (3) Appellant failed to specifically plead the words alleged to be libelous or any special damages associated with his claim of libel. The circuit court did not specify the ground for its dismissal. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. We affirm in accordance with Rule

84.16(b). Separate Opinion: This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.