Stahlhuth v. Stahlhuth

Missouri Court of Appeals

Stahlhuth v. Stahlhuth

412 S.W.3d 359, 2013 WL 4574898, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 973

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 27, 2013

DocketNo. ED 98861

StatusPublished

This text of 412 S.W.3d 359 (Stahlhuth v. Stahlhuth) 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

Stahlhuth v. Stahlhuth, 412 S.W.3d 359, 2013 WL 4574898, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 973 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

William R. Stahlhuth appeals from the trial court’s Amended Findings, Conclusions and Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage dissolving his marriage to Lisa A. Stahlhuth. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the judgment of the trial court was supported by substantial evidence, was not against the weight of the evidence, and did not erroneously declare or apply the law. Ulreich v. Kreutz, 876 S.W.2d 726, 728 (Mo.App. E.D.1994). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

William R. Stahlhuth appeals from the trial court’s Amended Findings, Conclusions and Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage dissolving his marriage to Lisa A. Stahlhuth. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the judgment of the trial court was supported by substantial evidence, was not against the weight of the evidence, and did not erroneously declare or apply the law. Ulreich v. Kreutz, 876 S.W.2d 726, 728 (Mo.App. E.D.1994). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

412 S.W.3d 359, 2013 WL 4574898, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 973, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stahlhuth-v-stahlhuth-moctapp-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack