Case Name: In the Interest of A.R.S. and A.D.S.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-02-13
Citations: 391 S.W.3d 916
Docket Number: Nos. ED 98503, ED 98573, ED 98504, ED 98572
Parties: In the Interest of A.R.S. and A.D.S.
Judges: Before LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, P.J., PATRICIA L. COHEN, and KURT S. ODENWALD, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 391
Pages: 916–916

Head Matter:
In the Interest of A.R.S. and A.D.S.
Nos. ED 98503, ED 98573, ED 98504, ED 98572.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
Feb. 13, 2013.
Deborah M. Bird, St. Louis, MO, Kerry D. Allen, Chesterfield, MO, for appellant.
Chris Koster, Atty. Gen., Gary L. Gardner, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Matthew Mahaffey, St. Louis, MO, Guardian Ad Litem.
Before LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, P.J., PATRICIA L. COHEN, and KURT S. ODENWALD, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
In this consolidated appeal, the mother, L.S.S., and the father, A.R.S., challenge the trial court's judgment terminating their parental rights to their children, A.R.S. and A.D.S. An opinion would have no precedential value. We have furnished the parties with a memorandum, for their information only, explaining the reasons for our decision. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b)(1).