Darnell v. Darnell

Missouri Court of Appeals

Darnell v. Darnell

768 S.W.2d 669, 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 558, 1989 WL 39282

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 25, 1989·No. No. 54702·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Respondent, Clarence Darnell, appeals from a decree of dissolution of marriage. He alleges that the trial court erred in ordering him to pay a $1,500 fee to his wife’s attorney.

The judgment of the trial court is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Respondent, Clarence Darnell, appeals from a decree of dissolution of marriage. He alleges that the trial court erred in ordering him to pay a $1,500 fee to his wife’s attorney.

The judgment of the trial court is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Darnell v. Darnell, 768 S.W.2d 669, 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 558, 1989 WL 39282 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

768 S.W.2d 669 (Darnell v. Darnell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.