Case ID: sw2d_856/html/0694-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Peggy Lynn BOEHRINGER, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Russell Lee BOEHRINGER, Respondent.
    No. 62520.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    July 20, 1993.
    Lester H. Goldman, St. Ann, for appellant.
    Michael L. Lyons, Clayton, for respondent.
    Before AHRENS, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

In this dissolution action, wife appeals from the trial court’s order denying maintenance and awarding husband’s pension plan to husband with no finding of the present value of the pension.

The motion court’s findings are not clearly erroneous, and no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum 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).