In Re Km
This text of 356 S.W.3d 263 (In Re Km) 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
In the Matter of K.M. and K.B., Petitioners.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
Cherlyn M. Crosby, Scott C. Trout, St. Louis, MO, Leonard Komen, Clayton, MO, For Appellant.
Catherine Ward Keefe, Jayne M. Glaser, Clayton, MO, Benicia A. Baker-Livorsi, St. Charles, MO, For Respondent.
John R. Bird, Guardian Ad Litem, St. Louis, MO, For Juvenile.
Anthony E. Rothert, St. Louis, MO, Elizabeth L. Mitchell, Daniel S. Volchok, Washington, DC, Elizabeth C. Mooney, Boston, MA, Leslie Cooper, New York, NY, For Amicus Curae.
Before ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J., and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J.
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
P.M. appeals from the circuit court's Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgment/Order (judgment) denying her Motion to Intervene. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the circuit court's judgment is supported by substantial evidence. Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo.banc 1976). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 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
356 S.W.3d 263, 2011 WL 5065031, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-km-moctapp-2011.