Case Name: In the Interest of K.J.D., JR., D.A.D., J.A.D., H.J.D., Plaintiff; Juvenile Officer, Respondent, v. K.J.D., Sr. (Father), Appellant, T.L.S. (Mother), Defendant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2004-03-09
Citations: 128 S.W.3d 194
Docket Number: Nos. WD 63121-WD 63124
Parties: In the Interest of K.J.D., JR., D.A.D., J.A.D., H.J.D., Plaintiff; Juvenile Officer, Respondent, v. K.J.D., Sr. (Father), Appellant, T.L.S. (Mother), Defendant.
Judges: Before: HARDWICK, P.J., SPINDEN and NEWTON, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 128
Pages: 194–195

Head Matter:
In the Interest of K.J.D., JR., D.A.D., J.A.D., H.J.D., Plaintiff; Juvenile Officer, Respondent, v. K.J.D., Sr. (Father), Appellant, T.L.S. (Mother), Defendant.
Nos. WD 63121-WD 63124.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
March 9, 2004.
Juliann W. Graves, Overland Park, KS, Attorney and Guardian for KJD, Jr., DAD, JAD and HJD.
John R. Shank, Jr., Kansas City, MO, for respondent Juvenile Officer.
Steven M. Petry, Kansas City, MO, for appellant KJD Sr.
Jack A. Lewis, North Kansas City, MO, for defendant TLS.
Before: HARDWICK, P.J., SPINDEN and NEWTON, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
K.J.D., Sr. (Father) appeals from a judgment terminating parental rights to his four sons, K.J.D., Jr., D.A.D., H.J.D., and J.A.D. Upon review of the record, we find the judgment is supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence of Father's abandonment of the children, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Father's motion for continuance. The parties have been provided with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision to affirm the judgment, because a published opinion would have no precedential value.
Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).