Case Name: In the Interest of J.A.D. & J.T.D.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2003-04-08
Citations: 103 S.W.3d 847
Docket Number: No. ED 81266
Parties: In the Interest of J.A.D. & J.T.D.
Judges: Before MARY R. RUSSELL, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS and BOOKER T. SHAW, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 103
Pages: 847–848

Head Matter:
In the Interest of J.A.D. & J.T.D.
No. ED 81266.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
April 8, 2003.
Cyril M. Hendricks, Louis J. Basso, Jefferson City, MO, for appellant.
Julie Forman Jones, Union, MO, for respondent.
Before MARY R. RUSSELL, P.J., CLIFFORD H. AHRENS and BOOKER T. SHAW, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
J.A.S. ("Mother") appeals from the trial court's judgment terminating her parental rights to her son, J.T.D. ("Son"), and her daughter, J.A.D. ("Daughter"), (collectively "the Children"). Mother argues the trial court erred in terminating her parental rights because the State failed to show: (1) by clear, cogent and convincing evidence that grounds for termination of her parental rights existed under Sections 211.444, 211.447.4(1) and 211.447.6, RSMo 2000; and (2) termination of her parental rights would be in the best interest of the Children.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and no error of law appears. The judgment of the trial court terminating the parental rights of Mother is affirmed. No precedential or jurisprudential purpose would be served by an opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. However, a memorandum opinion has been provided to the parties, for their use only, setting forth the reasons for this order. We affirm pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).