Case Name: Ray VINSON, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Deanna VINSON, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2006-04-18
Citations: 189 S.W.3d 650
Docket Number: Nos. ED 86117, ED 86125
Parties: Ray VINSON, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Deanna VINSON, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J., and ROY L. RICHTER, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 189
Pages: 650–650

Head Matter:
Ray VINSON, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Deanna VINSON, Respondent/Respondent.
Nos. ED 86117, ED 86125.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
April 18, 2006.
Craig G. Kallen III, Hais, Hais & Ral-len, P.C., Edward L. Dowd, Jr., James F. Bennett, Kenneth L. Marshall, Bryan Cave L.L.P., St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Michael A. Gross, Joseph F. Yeckel, Law Offices of Michael A. Gross, Allan H. Zerman, James P. Carmody, Zerman & Mogerman LLC, St. Louis, MO, for respondent.
Before KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J., and ROY L. RICHTER, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner husband appeals from the trial court's judgment denying his petition for a full order of protection under the Adult Abuse Act. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order.
We affirm pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).