Case Name: Deborah BLAISDELL, Petitioner/Respondent, v. Richard BLAISDELL, Respondent/Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2009-10-13
Citations: 294 S.W.3d 140
Docket Number: No. ED 91942
Parties: Deborah BLAISDELL, Petitioner/Respondent, v. Richard BLAISDELL, Respondent/Appellant.
Judges: Before SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 294
Pages: 140–140

Head Matter:
Deborah BLAISDELL, Petitioner/Respondent, v. Richard BLAISDELL, Respondent/Appellant.
No. ED 91942.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Oct. 13, 2009.
Nathan S. Cohen, Clayton, MO, for Petitioner/Respondent.
James M. Martin, St. Louis, MO, for Respondent/Appellant.
Before SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Richard Blaisdell appeals from the trial court's judgment denying his Motion to Modify the Modified Decree of Dissolution (Motion to Modify) seeking to terminate his maintenance and life insurance obligations to Deborah Blaisdell. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court's judgment is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence, and does not erroneously declare or apply the law. Haynes v. Almuttar, 25 S.W.3d 667, 671 (Mo.App. W.D. 2000). 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 them use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).