Case Name: In the Interest of L.D.W., a minor. In the Interest of L.M.W., a minor. In the Interest of L.D.B., a minor. Missouri Department Of Social Services, Division of Family Services, Petitioner/Respondent, v. L.W., Sr., Respondent/Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2002-03-26
Citations: 71 S.W.3d 261
Docket Number: Nos. ED 79588, ED 79589, ED 79590
Parties: In the Interest of L.D.W., a minor. In the Interest of L.M.W., a minor. In the Interest of L.D.B., a minor. Missouri Department Of Social Services, Division of Family Services, Petitioner/Respondent, v. L.W., Sr., Respondent/Appellant.
Judges: Before WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, JR., P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J. and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 71
Pages: 261–261

Head Matter:
In the Interest of L.D.W., a minor. In the Interest of L.M.W., a minor. In the Interest of L.D.B., a minor. Missouri Department Of Social Services, Division of Family Services, Petitioner/Respondent, v. L.W., Sr., Respondent/Appellant.
Nos. ED 79588, ED 79589, ED 79590.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
March 26, 2002.
Richard J. Childress, Laura Ann Ayres, Division of Legal Services, St. Louis, MO, for petitioner/respondent.
Douglas A. Forsyth, St. Louis, MO, for respondent/appellant.
Timothy J. Smith, St. Louis, MO, Guardian Ad Litem.
Before WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, JR., P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J. and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Father appeals from the judgment of the trial court terminating his parental rights to three children. The judgment is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976).
An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion, for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.
The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).