D.H. v. B.L.G.

Missouri Court of Appeals

D.H. v. B.L.G.

213 S.W.3d 732, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 213

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 13, 2007·No. No. WD 66943·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

J.G. appeals a judgment terminating his parental rights to two of his natural daughters, L.J.D. and T.N.G., in conjunction with the adoption of the two girls by their maternal grandmother, D.H. J.G. challenges the sufficiency of the evidence [733]*733supporting the trial court’s findings of abandonment and neglect. J.G. also claims that the court erred in denying his motions for a continuance and for recusal of the judge. Having carefully considered J.G.’s contentions on appeal, we find no basis for reversing the decision of the trial court. A published formal opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

J.G. appeals a judgment terminating his parental rights to two of his natural daughters, L.J.D. and T.N.G., in conjunction with the adoption of the two girls by their maternal grandmother, D.H. J.G. challenges the sufficiency of the evidence [733]*733supporting the trial court’s findings of abandonment and neglect. J.G. also claims that the court erred in denying his motions for a continuance and for recusal of the judge. Having carefully considered J.G.’s contentions on appeal, we find no basis for reversing the decision of the trial court. A published formal opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

D.H. v. B.L.G., 213 S.W.3d 732, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 213 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

213 S.W.3d 732 (D.H. v. B.L.G.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related