Chatman v. Chatman

783 S.W.2d 131, 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 1683, 1989 WL 145907
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 28, 1989·No. No. 56416·Published

Opinion

CRIST, Judge.

Husband appeals a pendente lite order in his dissolution case granting wife $80 per week maintenance and $800 for her attorney fees.

[132]*132The trial court has broad discretion in pendente lite orders in a dissolution case. In re the Marriage of Newman, 601 S.W.2d 632, 633[1] (Mo.App.1980). An appeal should not be taken unless there is a clear abuse of such discretion. Knauss v. Knauss, 425 S.W.2d 713, 716[1] (Mo.App.1968). We find no such abuse in this case.

The judgment of the trial court is supported by substantial evidence, does not erroneously apply the law, and is not against the weight of the evidence. Newman, 601 S.W.2d at 633[1]. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. Rule 84.16(b).

GARY M. GAERTNER, P.J., and REINHARD, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Chatman v. Chatman, 783 S.W.2d 131, 1989 Mo. App. LEXIS 1683, 1989 WL 145907 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989).

783 S.W.2d 131 (Chatman v. Chatman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Knauss v. Knauss
425 S.W.2d 713 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1968)
In re the Marriage of Newman
601 S.W.2d 632 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1980)