Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

93 S.W.3d 764

In re A.N.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided November 12, 2002

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 2002-11-12

Relies on In Re DC

Decided 2002-11-12

¶1ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2B.N. (“Mother”) appeals the trial court’s judgment terminating her parental rights to her four children. She argues the trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter the judgment because the matter was not properly assigned to the trial judge, the court lacked a knowing and voluntary consent to termination, and no other evidence supported termination of her parental rights.

¶3We find the trial court properly had jurisdiction over Mother’s case. The judgment is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence, and does not erroneously declare or apply the law. In re D.C., 49 S.W.3d 694, 697 (Mo.App.2001).

¶4No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

¶5We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

/93/sw3d/764 · .json · Public domain