In the Interest of J.A.P.

Missouri Court of Appeals

In the Interest of J.A.P.

505 S.W.3d 400, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1243, 2016 WL 7094031

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 6, 2016

DocketNo. ED 104048

StatusPublished

This text of 505 S.W.3d 400 (In the Interest of J.A.P.) 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 J.A.P., 505 S.W.3d 400, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1243, 2016 WL 7094031 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Mother appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of Jefferson County terminating her parental rights to J.A.P. and J.A.P. Mother argues that the trial court erred by terminating her parental rights because its determination that Mother failed to rectify the conditions that originally led to the trial court assuming jurisdiction was not supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence. Finding no error, we affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and have determined that an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Mother appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of Jefferson County terminating her parental rights to J.A.P. and J.A.P. Mother argues that the trial court erred by terminating her parental rights because its determination that Mother failed to rectify the conditions that originally led to the trial court assuming jurisdiction was not supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence. Finding no error, we affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and have determined that an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

505 S.W.3d 400, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1243, 2016 WL 7094031, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-jap-moctapp-2016.