Case Name: In the Interest of B.D.C. and T.A.C., minors. M.A.C., appellant, v. J.E.R. and P.D.R., Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1999-01-05
Citations: 983 S.W.2d 208
Docket Number: No. 74198
Parties: In the Interest of B.D.C. and T.A.C., minors. M.A.C., appellant, v. J.E.R. and P.D.R., Respondent.
Judges: Before ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., C.J., and KAROHL, J., and CRIST, Senior Judge.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 983
Pages: 208–208

Head Matter:
In the Interest of B.D.C. and T.A.C., minors. M.A.C., appellant, v. J.E.R. and P.D.R., Respondent.
No. 74198.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.
Jan. 5, 1999.
Marie Kenyon, Jane Aiken, Daniel Brownstone, St. Louis, for appellant.
Rita M. Montgomery, St. Louis, for respondent.
Before ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., C.J., and KAROHL, J., and CRIST, Senior Judge.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Mother of B.D.C., age 3, and T.A.C., age 2, appeals termination of her parental rights pursuant to Section 211.447.2 RSMo Cum. Supp. 1996. The natural fathers did not appeal the judgments terminating their rights.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the entire record. We conclude there is clear, cogent, and convincing evidence to support finding at least one statutory ground for termination of parental rights of mother for each of the two children. This is sufficient to affirm the judgment. In Interest of E.B.S., 876 S.W.2d 8, 10 (Mo.App.S.D. 1994). We find no error of law. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The judgments are affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).