Case Name: In The Interest of R.A.R.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2000-05-09
Citations: 16 S.W.3d 757
Docket Number: No. ED 75879
Parties: In The Interest of R.A.R.
Judges: Before GARY M. GAERTNER, P.J. and PAUL J. SIMON and JAMES R. DOWD, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 16
Pages: 757–757

Head Matter:
In The Interest of R.A.R.
No. ED 75879.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
May 9, 2000.
William P. Grant, Margulis, Grant & Margulis, P.C., St. Louis, for appellant.
Cynthia Harcourt-Hearring, Family Court of St. Louis County, Clayton, for respondent.
Before GARY M. GAERTNER, P.J. and PAUL J. SIMON and JAMES R. DOWD, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
T.R., mother, appeals the judgment of the trial court terminating her parental rights as to R.A.R., Jr., her minor child. On appeal, mother contends that the trial court erred in its judgment because its decision was against the weight of the evidence and contrary to existing law in that insufficient evidence was presented to support a finding by clear, cogent and convincing evidence that grounds for termination existed under either section 211.447.2(1) (all further references shall be to RSMo 1994, unless otherwise noted), or 211.447.4(2) and (3).
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. An extended opinion reciting detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).