F.B. v. Martin

Missouri Court of Appeals

F.B. v. Martin

309 S.W.3d 395, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 431, 2010 WL 1438978

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 13, 2010

DocketWD 71193

StatusPublished

This text of 309 S.W.3d 395 (F.B. v. Martin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

F.B. v. Martin, 309 S.W.3d 395, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 431, 2010 WL 1438978 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Glen Martin appeals the trial court’s judgment granting a full order of protection to F.B. against Mr. Martin. On appeal, Mr. Martin claims that the trial court’s finding that he stalked F.B. is not supported by substantial evidence in that there was insufficient evidence of repeated conduct by Mr. Martin which would cause a reasonable fear of danger of physical harm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

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

PER CURIAM:

Glen Martin appeals the trial court’s judgment granting a full order of protection to F.B. against Mr. Martin. On appeal, Mr. Martin claims that the trial court’s finding that he stalked F.B. is not supported by substantial evidence in that there was insufficient evidence of repeated conduct by Mr. Martin which would cause a reasonable fear of danger of physical harm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

309 S.W.3d 395, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 431, 2010 WL 1438978, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fb-v-martin-moctapp-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack