M.O v. J.T.C

Missouri Court of Appeals

M.O v. J.T.C

437 S.W.3d 829

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 5, 2014

DocketNo. ED 100368

StatusPublished

This text of 437 S.W.3d 829 (M.O v. J.T.C) 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

M.O v. J.T.C, 437 S.W.3d 829 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

M.O. (“Mother”) appeals from the judgment of the trial court denying her petition for a full order of protection against J.T.C. (“Father”) under Missouri’s Adult Abuse Act. Mother contends the trial court erred in denying her petition because there was “substantial evidence to support a finding of abuse.”

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court 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.

M.O. (“Mother”) appeals from the judgment of the trial court denying her petition for a full order of protection against J.T.C. (“Father”) under Missouri’s Adult Abuse Act. Mother contends the trial court erred in denying her petition because there was “substantial evidence to support a finding of abuse.”

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

437 S.W.3d 829, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mo-v-jtc-moctapp-2014.