¶1Dissolution ease. On appeal, husband complains about the distribution of the marital property; the award of maintenance to wife; and the amount of wife’s attorney’s fees he has been ordered to pay. Our review of the record leads us to conclude that the court decree is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. Neither does there appear an erroneous declaration nor application of the law. Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo.banc 1976). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. Affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
636 S.W.2d 408
Steik v. Steik
Decided July 6, 1982
Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 1982-07-06
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 1988
1 state decisions
Relies on Murphy v. Carron
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1982-07-06
View the full empirical analysis of this case →