Ott Law Firm Agent-Safe Plain Text
Official source remains authoritative.

Case: Eileen Marie Kinsley, Appellant, v. Walter William Kinsley, Respondent.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
Decision Date: Unknown
Outcome: affirmed
Practice Area: family-law
Canonical URL: https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/eileen-marie-kinsley-appellant-v-walter-william-kinsley-respondent-12582
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=12582
Related Practice Areas:
- Family Law: https://ott.law/practice-areas/family?ott_archive=missouri-courts&ott_archive_practice_area=family&ott_archive_query=Eileen+Marie+Kinsley%2C+Appellant%2C+v.+Walter+William+Kinsley%2C+Respondent.&ott_archive_link_source=tag&ott_archive_link_score=20&ott_archive_link_evidence=tag%3A+family-law&ott_archive_location=opinion_plain_text_practice_area (slug: family; source: tag; score: 20; evidence: tag: family-law)

---
## Opinion

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Opinion
Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District
Case Style:  Eileen Marie Kinsley, Appellant, v. Walter William Kinsley, Respondent.
Case Number:  71116
Handdown Date:  11/18/1997
Appeal From:  Circuit Court of Franklin County, Hon. Joseph Ladd
Counsel for Appellant:  Timothy Hill Battern
Counsel for Respondent:  Joseph R. Aubuchon
Opinion Summary: 
None
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  PER CURIAM
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.  Crahan, C.J., Crane, J. and Blackmar, Sr.J., concur.
Opinion:
ORDER
Wife appeals from the grant of Husband's motion for new trial in their dissolution action. We have reviewed the 
briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. An extended opinion would have no precedential 
value. 
The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b). 
Separate Opinion:
None
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.