Case Name: In the Interest of M.B., a minor child. Juvenile Officer, Respondent, v. W.B., Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2002-12-03
Citations: 91 S.W.3d 683
Docket Number: No. ED 81301
Parties: In the Interest of M.B., a minor child. Juvenile Officer, Respondent, v. W.B., Appellant.
Judges: Before ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., P.J., and MARY K. HOFF and GEORGE W. DRAPER III, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 91
Pages: 683–684

Head Matter:
In the Interest of M.B., a minor child. Juvenile Officer, Respondent, v. W.B., Appellant.
No. ED 81301.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Dec. 3, 2002.
Janice L. Palozola, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.
Cynthia L. Harcourt-Hearring, St. Louis, for respondent
Adrienne L. Schaffer-James, Clayton, for Guardian Ad Litem.
Before ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., P.J., and MARY K. HOFF and GEORGE W. DRAPER III, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
W.B. (Mother) appeals from the judgment of the trial court terminating her parental rights to her natural child, M.B. (Child). In her three points on appeal, Mother argues the trial court erred in terminating her parental rights in that there was insufficient clear, cogent, and convincing evidence to support the findings made pursuant to Sections 211.447.4(1), (2), and (3), RSMo 2000, respectively. We affirm.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).