In the Estate of Edwards

Missouri Court of Appeals

In the Estate of Edwards

220 S.W.3d 892, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 689, 2007 WL 1324351

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 1, 2007

DocketED 87595

StatusPublished

This text of 220 S.W.3d 892 (In the Estate of Edwards) 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

In the Estate of Edwards, 220 S.W.3d 892, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 689, 2007 WL 1324351 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Mary Edwards (“Mary”) appeals from a judgment of the trial court in favor of Janet Edwards (“Janet”) on Janet’s petition for determination of marital status and heirship. Mary claims two points on appeal. First, she claims that the trial court erred in finding that Janet was the surviving spouse of Clifford Edwards (“Decedent”) because it incorrectly applied the law by giving Janet the benefit of the presumption that her marriage is the valid one. Second, Mary contends that the trial court erred in finding that Janet was the surviving spouse of Decedent because Mary rebutted the presumption of the validity of Janet’s marriage to Decedent.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their in *893 formation only, which sets forth the facts and reasons for this order.

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

PER CURIAM.

Mary Edwards (“Mary”) appeals from a judgment of the trial court in favor of Janet Edwards (“Janet”) on Janet’s petition for determination of marital status and heirship. Mary claims two points on appeal. First, she claims that the trial court erred in finding that Janet was the surviving spouse of Clifford Edwards (“Decedent”) because it incorrectly applied the law by giving Janet the benefit of the presumption that her marriage is the valid one. Second, Mary contends that the trial court erred in finding that Janet was the surviving spouse of Decedent because Mary rebutted the presumption of the validity of Janet’s marriage to Decedent.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their in *893 formation only, which sets forth the facts and reasons for this order.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

220 S.W.3d 892, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 689, 2007 WL 1324351, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-estate-of-edwards-moctapp-2007.