Case Name: In re the MARRIAGE OF Saib A. AL-HAMDY and Fatin H. NOOR Saib A. Al-Hamdy, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Fatin H. Noor, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2012-01-31
Citations: 371 S.W.3d 5
Docket Number: No. ED 96740
Parties: In re the MARRIAGE OF Saib A. AL-HAMDY and Fatin H. NOOR Saib A. Al-Hamdy, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Fatin H. Noor, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., KENNETH M. ROMINES, J., and ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 371
Pages: 5–5

Head Matter:
In re the MARRIAGE OF Saib A. AL-HAMDY and Fatin H. NOOR Saib A. Al-Hamdy, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Fatin H. Noor, Respondent/Respondent.
No. ED 96740.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Jan. 31, 2012.
Jonathan D. Marks, The Marks Law Firm, LLC, Creve Coeur, MO, for appellant.
Jack F. Allen, Clayton, MO, for respondent.
Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., KENNETH M. ROMINES, J., and ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Husband, Saib A. Al-Hamdy, appeals from a decree of dissolution of marriage. The judgment is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence, and does not erroneously declare or apply the law. Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (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 for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.
We affirm pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).