ASKEW-KLEIN v. Klein

248 S.W.3d 640, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 416, 2008 WL 821009
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 25, 2008·No. ED 89650·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth D. Klein appeals from the trial court’s judgment modifying his maintenance obligation. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court’s judgment is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence, and does not erroneously declare *641 or apply the law. Beeler v. Beeler, 820 S.W.2d 657, 661 (Mo.App. W.D.1991). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

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

ASKEW-KLEIN v. Klein, 248 S.W.3d 640, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 416, 2008 WL 821009 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

248 S.W.3d 640 (ASKEW-KLEIN v. Klein) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kieffer v. Zucker
248 S.W.3d 640 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2008)