Hethcote v. Hethcote
This text of 245 S.W.3d 917 (Hethcote v. Hethcote) 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.
Opinion
ORDER
Former wife appeals from a judgment of the trial court modifying maintenance. The trial court’s judgment is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30, 82 (Mo. banc 1976). An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no prece-dential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opin[918]*918ion for their information only setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
245 S.W.3d 917, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 239, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hethcote-v-hethcote-moctapp-2008.