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

Case: Mary Lee Rost, Petitioner/Respondent v. Kenneth F. Rost, Sr., Respondent/Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
Decision Date: Unknown
Outcome: affirmed
Practice Area: family-law
Canonical URL: https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/mary-lee-rost-petitionerrespondent-v-kenneth-f-rost-sr-respondentappellan-16762
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=16762
Related Practice Areas:
- Family Law: https://ott.law/practice-areas/family?ott_archive=missouri-courts&ott_archive_practice_area=family&ott_archive_query=Mary+Lee+Rost%2C+Petitioner%2FRespondent+v.+Kenneth+F.+Rost%2C+Sr.%2C+Respondent%2FAppellant&ott_archive_link_source=tag&ott_archive_link_score=24&ott_archive_link_evidence=tag%3A+family-law%3B+text%3A+custody&ott_archive_location=opinion_plain_text_practice_area (slug: family; source: tag; score: 24; evidence: tag: family-law, text: custody, text: dissolution)

---
## 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:  Mary Lee Rost, Petitioner/Respondent v. Kenneth F. Rost, Sr., Respondent/Appellant
Case Number:  No. 70938
Handdown Date:  05/13/1997
Appeal From:  Circuit Court of Osage County, Hon. Jeffrey W. Schaeperkoetter
Counsel for Appellant: 
Counsel for Respondent: 
Opinion Summary: 
None
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  Per Curiam
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.  Before:  Dowd, Jr., P.J., Reinhard, J., and Gaertner, J.
Opinion:

O R D E R
Husband appeals from the trial court's order denying his motion to modify the child custody provision of 
a decree of dissolution.  We affirm.  The judgment of the trial court is supported by substantial evidence and is 
not against the weight of the evidence; no error of law appears.  An extended opinion would have no 
precedential value.  The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting 
forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to 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.