Apted v. Apted

Missouri Court of Appeals

Apted v. Apted

521 S.W.3d 289, 2017 WL 2644039, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 608

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 20, 2017

DocketNo. ED 104688

StatusPublished

This text of 521 S.W.3d 289 (Apted v. Apted) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Apted v. Apted, 521 S.W.3d 289, 2017 WL 2644039, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 608 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

[290]*290ORDER

PER CURIAM.

David Apted appeals from the judgment denying his motion to modify the amount of child support payments originally ordered in the judgment dissolving his marriage to Carla Apted. The judgment is not against the weight of the evidence and is supported by substantial evidence. No error of law appears. We affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[290]*290ORDER

PER CURIAM.

David Apted appeals from the judgment denying his motion to modify the amount of child support payments originally ordered in the judgment dissolving his marriage to Carla Apted. The judgment is not against the weight of the evidence and is supported by substantial evidence. No error of law appears. We affirm.

An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

521 S.W.3d 289, 2017 WL 2644039, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 608, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/apted-v-apted-moctapp-2017.