Sonderman v. St. Clair

188 S.W.3d 94, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 228
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 28, 2006·No. No. ED 86507·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Former husband appeals from a judgment of the trial court denying his motion to modify the maintenance award in a decree of dissolution. The trial court’s judgment is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976). An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. 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 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

Sonderman v. St. Clair, 188 S.W.3d 94, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 228 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).

188 S.W.3d 94 (Sonderman v. St. Clair) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Murphy v. Carron
536 S.W.2d 30 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1976)