Case ID: sw3d_383/html/0019-02.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

In re the MARRIAGE OF Maureen Ann ROBERTS and Jeremy Roberts Maureen Ann Roberts, Petitioner/Respondent, v. Jeremy Roberts, Respondent/Appellant.
    No. ED 97271.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
    Sept. 11, 2012.
    Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Oct. 23, 2012.
    
      Nathan A. Steimel, Lawrence J. Chrum, The Law Offices of Nathan A. Steimel, L.L.C., St. Charles, MO, for respondent.
    Aaron M. Staebell, Lohmar Staebell & Burlison Law Firm LLC, O’Fallon, MO, for appellant.
    Robert A. Bedell, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent Missouri Department of Labor and Industrial Relations Division of Employment Security.
    Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., MARY K. HOFF, J., and ANGELA T. QUIGLESS, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Father appeals from a judgment entered on the parties’ cross-motions to modify the child custody and support provisions of a dissolution decree. 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).