Case Name: In the Interest of F.M.D., Jr., Plaintiff. F.M.D., Appellant v. D.G. and S.G., Respondents
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2007-08-28
Citations: 231 S.W.3d 324
Docket Number: No. WD 67785
Parties: In the Interest of F.M.D., Jr., Plaintiff. F.M.D., Appellant v. D.G. and S.G., Respondents.
Judges: Before RONALD R. HOLLIGER, Presiding Judge, HAROLD L. LOWENSTEIN, Judge, and JAMES M. SMART., JR., Judge.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 231
Pages: 324–325

Head Matter:
In the Interest of F.M.D., Jr., Plaintiff. F.M.D., Appellant v. D.G. and S.G., Respondents.
No. WD 67785.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Aug. 28, 2007.
Kevin Wayne Kenney, Prairie Village, KS, for Appellant.
Jonathan Sheehy Zerr, Independence, for Respondent.
Before RONALD R. HOLLIGER, Presiding Judge, HAROLD L. LOWENSTEIN, Judge, and JAMES M. SMART., JR., Judge.

Opinion:
ORDER
F.M.D., Sr. ("Father") appeals a judgment terminating his parental rights to his natural son, F.M.D., Jr. ("F.M.D."), a minor. That judgment was entered in conjunction with F.M.D.'s adoption by his step-father. On appeal, Father, who did not consent to the adoption, challenges the trial court's finding of abandonment and neglect on the basis that such a finding is not supported by substantial evidence and is against the weight of the evidence. Father also claims that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his application for a continuance. Having carefully considered Father's contentions on appeal, we find no basis for reversing the decision of the trial court. A published formal opinion would have no precedential value, and the parties have been provided with a memorandum explaining the reasoning of the court. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).