Case Name: In re MARRIAGE OF Tommy VALIANT and Janet Valiant. Janet Valiant, Petitioner/Respondent, v. Tommy Valiant, Respondent/Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2007-09-18
Citations: 237 S.W.3d 236
Docket Number: No. ED 88978
Parties: In re MARRIAGE OF Tommy VALIANT and Janet Valiant. Janet Valiant, Petitioner/Respondent, v. Tommy Valiant, Respondent/Appellant.
Judges: Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and KENNETH M. ROMINES, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 237
Pages: 236–237

Head Matter:
In re MARRIAGE OF Tommy VALIANT and Janet Valiant. Janet Valiant, Petitioner/Respondent, v. Tommy Valiant, Respondent/Appellant.
No. ED 88978.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Sept. 18, 2007.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Oct. 18, 2007.
Application for Transfer Denied Nov. 20, 2007.
Janet Valiant, St. Louis, MO, pro se.
Gregory F. Quinn, Quinn, Ground & Banton, L.L.P., Manchester, MO, for appellant.
Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and KENNETH M. ROMINES, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Husband, Tommy Valiant, 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).