ORDER

Wei Wu (“Passenger”) and Xiaoyan Gu (‘Wife”) (collectively “Appellants”) appeal from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment against Performance Equipment, Ltd. (“Performance”). Appellants claim two points on appeal. First, they claim the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to Performance because there was a disputed material fact of where the rental agreement was signed. Second, Appellants claim the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to Performance because it applied Missouri law instead of Ontario Law.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, which sets forth the facts and reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).