Driemeyer v. Leahy

Missouri Court of Appeals

Driemeyer v. Leahy

471 S.W.3d 402, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1012, 2015 WL 5823842

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided October 6, 2015·No. No. ED 102227·Published

Opinion

ORDER ,

James Leahy (“Husband”) appeals. .a judgment for contempt arising.out of an alleged.breach of a settlement agreement incorporated into a judgment dissolving his marriage to Sheila A. Driemeyer (“Wife”).

Wé have reviewed the briefs of the par-tiés and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court did not err.' An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

, We- affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER ,

James Leahy (“Husband”) appeals. .a judgment for contempt arising.out of an alleged.breach of a settlement agreement incorporated into a judgment dissolving his marriage to Sheila A. Driemeyer (“Wife”).

Wé have reviewed the briefs of the par-tiés and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court did not err.' An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

, We- affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Driemeyer v. Leahy, 471 S.W.3d 402, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1012, 2015 WL 5823842 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

471 S.W.3d 402 (Driemeyer v. Leahy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.