Case Name: R. W. D., Respondent, v. L. J. D., Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1978-04-25
Citations: 567 S.W.2d 376
Docket Number: No. 39056
Parties: R. W. D., Respondent, v. L. J. D., Appellant.
Judges: SMITH and McMILLIAN, JJ., concur.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 567
Pages: 376–377

Head Matter:
R. W. D., Respondent, v. L. J. D., Appellant.
No. 39056.
Missouri Court of Appeals, St. Louis District, Division One.
April 25, 1978.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer Denied June 8, 1978.
Application to Transfer Denied July 24, 1978.
Prudence L. Fink, Union, for appellant.
Gael D. Wood, Jenny, Cole & Eckelkamp, Union, for respondent.

Opinion:
CLEMENS, Presiding Judge.
The parties were divorced and the wife has appealed from that part of the decree awarding primary child custody to the husband.
The husband has moved to dismiss the wife's appeal for failure on her brief to comply with Rules 84.04(c) and (h). Since custody of children is at issue we decline to dismiss the appeal and rule the case on the merits.
After thorough consideration, the trial court found that although both parties were fit to have custody of the children, their best interest would be served by granting primary custody to the husband, subject to liberal visitation by and tempo rary custody with the wife. The wife contends the award was not supported by substantial evidence and that the trial court erroneously applied the law in making the award.
We have reviewed the entire record and cases cited by the parties and find, contrary to the wife's contention, that there was competent, substantial evidence upon which the trial court based its award and that the trial court did not erroneously apply the law. Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. 1976). Pursuant to Rule 84.16(b), V.A.M.R., an extended opinion would have no prece-dential value and we affirm.
SMITH and McMILLIAN, JJ., concur.