Yao v. Yao

Missouri Court of Appeals

Yao v. Yao

523 S.W.3d 489, 2017 WL 1149638, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 222

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 28, 2017·No. No. ED 104105·Published

Opinion

[490] ORDER

PER CURIAM

Franck William Yao (“Father”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment granting Tamara R. Yao’s (“Mother”) Cross-Motion to Modify Judgment/Order (“Cross-Motion to Modify”), Amended Judgment/Order and Decree of Dissolution, which abrogated joint legal custody, awarded Mother sole legal custody, and ordered Father to pay a portion of Mother’s attorney’s fees in the amount of $15,000. We affirm.

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 for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

[490] ORDER

PER CURIAM

Franck William Yao (“Father”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment granting Tamara R. Yao’s (“Mother”) Cross-Motion to Modify Judgment/Order (“Cross-Motion to Modify”), Amended Judgment/Order and Decree of Dissolution, which abrogated joint legal custody, awarded Mother sole legal custody, and ordered Father to pay a portion of Mother’s attorney’s fees in the amount of $15,000. We affirm.

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 for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Yao v. Yao, 523 S.W.3d 489, 2017 WL 1149638, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 222 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

523 S.W.3d 489 (Yao v. Yao) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.