Case Name: Lulu B. Burk, Respondent, v. William C. Burk, Appellant
Court: Kansas City Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1931-05-04
Citations: 225 Mo. App. 746
Docket Number: 
Parties: Lulu B. Burk, Respondent, v. William C. Burk, Appellant.
Judges: Boyer, C., concurs.
Reporter: Missouri Appeal Reports
Volume: 225
Pages: 746–746

Head Matter:
Lulu B. Burk, Respondent, v. William C. Burk, Appellant.
39 S. W. (2d) 454.
Kansas City Court of Appeals.
Opinion filed May 4, 1931.
Nick M. Bradley and Boy A. Jones for respondent.
Bichard H. Musser, Win. JS. Buddath and M. D. Aber for appellant.

Opinion:
CAMPBELL, C.
Action for divorce.
Upon trial in the court below, decree was rendered in favor of plaintiff and against defendant. Defendant appeals.
It appears from the abstract of the record furnished by defendant that motion for new trial has not been preserved in a bill of exceptions. There is therefore nothing before us for review, except the record proper, in which there is no claim of error. [Roden v. Helm, 192 Mo. 71, 81, 90 S. W. 798.]
The judgment is affirmed.
Boyer, C., concurs.
PER CURIAM: — The foregoing opinion by Campbell, C., is adopted as the opinion of the court. The judgment is affirmed.
All concur, except Trimble, P. Jabsent.