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. (2018)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

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 Consolidated with WD 80916, WD 80917, WD 80922, WD 80923, and WD 80924

Decided: May 29, 2018

Before Division One: Lisa White Hardwick, Presiding Judge, Thomas H. Newton and Cynthia L. Martin, Judges

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.

Order

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)

Per Curiam

Was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go to Learn About the Law