Case Name: In the Interest of: J.F., M.D.F. and R.A.F., Juvenile Officer, Respondent, v. R.D.F. (Father); T.M.F. (Mother), Appellants.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2018-05-29
Citations: 548 S.W.3d 454
Docket Number: WD 80915; C/w WD 80916, WD 80917, WD 80922, WD 80923, WD 80924
Parties: In the Interest of: J.F., M.D.F. and R.A.F., Juvenile Officer, Respondent,
v.
R.D.F. (Father); T.M.F. (Mother), Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 548
Pages: 454–454

Head Matter:
In the Interest of: J.F., M.D.F. and R.A.F., Juvenile Officer, Respondent,
v.
R.D.F. (Father); T.M.F. (Mother), Appellants.
WD 80915
C/w WD 80916, WD 80917, WD 80922, WD 80923, WD 80924
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Filed: May 29, 2018
Stephen C. Pratte, Fulton, for appellant R.D.F., Linda G. Harris, Columbia for appellant T.M.F.
Mary B. Mueller, Columbia for respondent Juvenile Officer; Casey R. Berndt, Columbia for respondent for Dept. of Social Services; Casey R. Berndt, Columbia for J.F., M.D.F., and R.A.F.
Before Division One: Lisa White Hardwick, Presiding Judge, Thomas H. Newton and Cynthia L. Martin, Judges
ORDER

Opinion:
Per Curiam
T.M.F. (Mother) and R.D.F. (Father) appeal the circuit court court's judgment terminating parental rights to their children: J.F., M.D.F., and R.A.F. Appellants contend the judgment should be reversed because it is not supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence of parental unfitness as the statutory basis for termination. Appellants also contend the court abused its discretion in determining that the termination was in the best interest of the children. Upon review of the briefs and the record, we find no error and affirm the judgment. We have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision, because a published opinion would have no precedential value.
AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b)