Case Name: Richard J. CRAIG, Petitioner/Respondent, v. Lorna L. HOUSE, Respondent/Appellant.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2018-03-06
Citations: 545 S.W.3d 926
Docket Number: No. ED 105320
Parties: Richard J. CRAIG, Petitioner/Respondent,
v.
Lorna L. HOUSE, Respondent/Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 545
Pages: 926–927

Head Matter:
Richard J. CRAIG, Petitioner/Respondent,
v.
Lorna L. HOUSE, Respondent/Appellant.
No. ED 105320
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE.
Filed: March 6, 2018
Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied April 10, 2018
Application for Transfer Denied May 22, 2018
Frank Conard, 6209 Mid Rivers Mall Drive, Box 142, St. Peters, MO 63304, For Petitioner/Respondent.
Cheryl A. Rafert, 4232 Forest Park Avenue, St. Louis, MO 63108, For Respondent/Appellant.
Before Robert G. Dowd, Jr., P.J., Sherri B. Sullivan, J., and Kurt S. Odenwald, J.
ORDER

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Lorna L. House appeals from the trial court's judgment denying her Motion for Contempt and Sanctions and finding Richard J. Craig not in contempt for failing to pay maintenance as ordered in the Decree of Dissolution. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the judgment of the motion court was supported by substantial evidence and was not an abuse of discretion. Nance v. Nance, 880 S.W.2d 341, 343 (Mo. App. E.D. 1994) ; Henderson v. Henderson, 389 S.W.3d 260, 266 (Mo. App. E.D. 2012). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).