Waller-Lee v. Lee

Missouri Court of Appeals

Waller-Lee v. Lee

486 S.W.3d 928, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 151, 2016 WL 720550

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 23, 2016·No. No. ED 102787·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Kevin Lee appeals from the judgment dissolving his marriage, claiming that the trial court lacked personal jurisdiction, that the division of marital property was erroneous and that the court erred in accepting his wife’s consent to and waiver of conflict of interest regarding Lee’s counsel.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Kevin Lee appeals from the judgment dissolving his marriage, claiming that the trial court lacked personal jurisdiction, that the division of marital property was erroneous and that the court erred in accepting his wife’s consent to and waiver of conflict of interest regarding Lee’s counsel.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Waller-Lee v. Lee, 486 S.W.3d 928, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 151, 2016 WL 720550 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

486 S.W.3d 928 (Waller-Lee v. Lee) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.