Case Name: In the Interest of: L.Y.S.B.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2010-02-16
Citations: 306 S.W.3d 652
Docket Number: No. ED 93151
Parties: In the Interest of: L.Y.S.B.
Judges: Before SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 306
Pages: 652–653

Head Matter:
In the Interest of: L.Y.S.B.
No. ED 93151.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Feb. 16, 2010.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied March 29, 2010.
Mary Lynn Fox Reichert, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.
John W. Thompson, St. Louis, MO, for Respondent Juvenile Officer.
Gary L. Gardner, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent Children’s Division.
David A. Shaller, Guardian Ad Litem, St. Louis, MO, for Mother.
Dorothy E. Schuchat, Guardian Ad Li-tem, St. Louis, MO, for Juvenile.
Before SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, P.J., ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J., and PATRICIA L. COHEN, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
C.B. appeals from the trial court's judgment terminating her parental rights to her son contending there was insufficient evidence supporting the grounds for termination and the court's finding that termination was in the best interests of the child. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the trial court's finding that grounds for termination of Mother's parental rights existed is supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence and that the court's finding that termination was in the best interests of the child is supported by a preponderance, of the evidence. In re E.F.B.D., 245 S.W.3d 316, 319 (Mo.App. S.D.2008). 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).