Miller v. Miller

Missouri Court of Appeals

Miller v. Miller

136 S.W.3d 118, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 724, 2004 WL 1102316

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Miller v. Miller. Read the opinion of the Court — 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 195 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 18, 2004·No. No. ED 83258·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Timothy Miller appeals the judgment denying his Rule 74.06(b) motion to set aside a portion of a dissolution decree.

We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal and find no error of law. A detailed opinion would be of no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Timothy Miller appeals the judgment denying his Rule 74.06(b) motion to set aside a portion of a dissolution decree.

We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal and find no error of law. A detailed opinion would be of no precedential value. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment under Rule 84.16(b).

Miller v. Miller, 136 S.W.3d 118, 2004 Mo. App. LEXIS 724, 2004 WL 1102316 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

136 S.W.3d 118 (Miller v. Miller) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.