Case Name: James HOWARD, Appellant, v. Bernice HOWARD, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1992-09-01
Citations: 834 S.W.2d 914
Docket Number: No. 60869
Parties: James HOWARD, Appellant, v. Bernice HOWARD, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 834
Pages: 914–914

Head Matter:
James HOWARD, Appellant, v. Bernice HOWARD, Respondent.
No. 60869.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Sept. 1, 1992.
Peter P. Fiore, Michael J. Mettes, St. Louis, for appellant.
Bernice Howard, pro se.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
James Howard appeals the modification of his decree of dissolution. The decree ordered him to pay $220 per month maintenance to his wife. The modification order reduced the maintenance obligation to $135 per month. James Howard contends he should not have to pay any maintenance.
The modification order is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. An opinion would have no prece-dential value.
Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).