Case Name: In the Interest of J.M.T.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2013-03-26
Citations: 400 S.W.3d 429
Docket Number: No. ED 98961
Parties: In the Interest of J.M.T.
Judges: Before CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and GLENN A. NORTON, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 400
Pages: 429–429

Head Matter:
In the Interest of J.M.T.
No. ED 98961.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
March 26, 2013.
Application for Transfer to Supreme Court Denied May 2, 2013.
Application for Transfer Denied June 25, 2013.
Irwin M. Roitman, Clayton, MO, for Appellant.
Allison Wolff, Clayton, MO, for Respondent Juvenile Officer.
David A. Shaller, Guardian ad Litem, for Juvenile.
Before CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and GLENN A. NORTON, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Leonard Stevens (Father) appeals from the trial court's judgment terminating his parental rights to his son, J.M.T. (Child), contending there was insufficient evidence supporting the grounds for termination and the court's finding that termination was in the best interests of Child. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court's judgment that grounds for termination of Father's parental rights exist is supported by substantial evidence, In re T.E, 35 S.W.3d 497, 501 (Mo.App. E.D.2001), and that such termination is in Child's best interest and was not an abuse of discretion. In re A.M.S., 272 S.W.3d 305, 308 (Mo.App. W.D.2008). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. 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 their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).