Case ID: sw2d_913/html/0441-01.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

David Alan GLENN, Appellant, v. Cynthia Marie GLENN, Respondent.
    No. 67585.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    Jan. 16, 1996.
    David A. Glenn, St. Louis, pro se.
    Heagney & Forst, Michael A. Forst, St. Louis, for Respondent.
    Before REINHARD, P.J., and CRANDALL and KAROHL, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Husband appeals custody and visitation provisions contained in dissolution decree. The parties have two children: a daughter, seven years of age and a son, four years of age. The decree was entered after an uncontested hearing where Husband appeared without counsel. Husband appears before this court pro se.

This appeal is subject to Wife’s request for dismissal for failure of Husband to comply with Rule 84.04. There are a number of procedural deficiencies in the presentation of the appeal. However, we affirm on the merits because the sole issue in dispute involves the children. This issue was understood by wife, as evidenced in her brief; and the procedural deficiencies create no undue hardship on this court.

The custody and visitation provisions in the decree of dissolution were approved by the parties during the trial and are supported by the evidence. In accord with Rule 73.01 and Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976), we affirm.