Juvenile Office of the 24th Judicial Circuit v. Cox

Missouri Court of Appeals

Juvenile Office of the 24th Judicial Circuit v. Cox

161 S.W.3d 900, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 614, 2005 WL 947004

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 26, 2005

DocketNo. ED 85072

StatusPublished

This text of 161 S.W.3d 900 (Juvenile Office of the 24th Judicial Circuit v. Cox) 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

Juvenile Office of the 24th Judicial Circuit v. Cox, 161 S.W.3d 900, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 614, 2005 WL 947004 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Mother appeals from the judgment terminating her parental rights to her daughter, E.N.C., and her son D.J.C., under Section 211.447, RSMo 2000. Mother contends the circuit court erred in terminating her parental rights pursuant to Section 211.447.4, RSMo 2000, because the findings for termination were not supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence, and in finding termination was in the best interest of the children.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find Mother’s claims of error to be without merit. The judgment of termination is supported by substantial clear, cogent, and convincing evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. In re C.N.W., 26 S.W.3d 386, 393 (Mo.App. E.D.2000). An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Mother appeals from the judgment terminating her parental rights to her daughter, E.N.C., and her son D.J.C., under Section 211.447, RSMo 2000. Mother contends the circuit court erred in terminating her parental rights pursuant to Section 211.447.4, RSMo 2000, because the findings for termination were not supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence, and in finding termination was in the best interest of the children.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find Mother’s claims of error to be without merit. The judgment of termination is supported by substantial clear, cogent, and convincing evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. In re C.N.W., 26 S.W.3d 386, 393 (Mo.App. E.D.2000). An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

161 S.W.3d 900, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 614, 2005 WL 947004, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/juvenile-office-of-the-24th-judicial-circuit-v-cox-moctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack