In the Interest of B.L.M.

Missouri Court of Appeals

In the Interest of B.L.M.

39 S.W.3d 75, 2001 Mo. App. LEXIS 422, 2001 WL 221643

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 6, 2001

DocketNo. ED 78019

StatusPublished

This text of 39 S.W.3d 75 (In the Interest of B.L.M.) 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 Interest of B.L.M., 39 S.W.3d 75, 2001 Mo. App. LEXIS 422, 2001 WL 221643 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

C.M. (Mother) and M.A.M. (Father) (collectively Appellants) both appeal from the judgment of the family court terminating their parental rights to their child B.L.M (Child). The appeals have been consolidated for purposes of this opinion. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the judgment of the family court is supported by substantial evidence. In the Interest of D.L.M., 31 S.W.3d 64, 68 (Mo.App. E.D.2000). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

C.M. (Mother) and M.A.M. (Father) (collectively Appellants) both appeal from the judgment of the family court terminating their parental rights to their child B.L.M (Child). The appeals have been consolidated for purposes of this opinion. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the judgment of the family court is supported by substantial evidence. In the Interest of D.L.M., 31 S.W.3d 64, 68 (Mo.App. E.D.2000). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 S.W.3d 75, 2001 Mo. App. LEXIS 422, 2001 WL 221643, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-blm-moctapp-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack