Cullen ex rel. Cullen v. Shupert

Missouri Court of Appeals

Cullen ex rel. Cullen v. Shupert

450 S.W.3d 462, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1096, 2014 WL 4823636

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 30, 2014·No. No. WD 76624·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Laura Shupert appeals from the trial court’s judgment of paternity, custody, visitation, and child support that ordered a minor child to be placed in joint legal and physical custody with the child’s father, and which adopted a parenting plan proposed by a Guardian Ad Litem. Laura Shupert asserts that the trial court erred in that it: (1) failed to make statutorily mandated written findings of fact and conclusions of law; (2) failed to grant a continuance to permit her to secure new counsel; (3) adopted the Guardian Ad Litem’s proposed parenting plan verbatim; and (4) exhibited judicial bias and prejudice during trial.

We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Laura Shupert appeals from the trial court’s judgment of paternity, custody, visitation, and child support that ordered a minor child to be placed in joint legal and physical custody with the child’s father, and which adopted a parenting plan proposed by a Guardian Ad Litem. Laura Shupert asserts that the trial court erred in that it: (1) failed to make statutorily mandated written findings of fact and conclusions of law; (2) failed to grant a continuance to permit her to secure new counsel; (3) adopted the Guardian Ad Litem’s proposed parenting plan verbatim; and (4) exhibited judicial bias and prejudice during trial.

We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Cullen ex rel. Cullen v. Shupert, 450 S.W.3d 462, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1096, 2014 WL 4823636 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

450 S.W.3d 462 (Cullen ex rel. Cullen v. Shupert) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.