Clayton v. Clayton

679 S.W.2d 431
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedOctober 9, 1984
DocketNo. 46399
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 679 S.W.2d 431 (Clayton v. Clayton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Clayton v. Clayton, 679 S.W.2d 431 (Mo. Ct. App. 1984).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal arises out of a motion to modify the child custody provisions of a dissolution decree. In the decree, the wife was granted custody of the parties’ two minor children. The husband filed a motion to modify the custody award. The court granted this motion, awarding custody of the children to the husband and granting the wife temporary custody and visitation rights. Eight days later, the wife filed a motion for a new trial. Fifty days after this, the court granted the wife’s motion and ordered a new trial.1 Twenty-five days after this order, the husband filed his notice of appeal from that order. We dismiss the appeal.

The trial court’s grant of a new trial to the wife was the disposition of an authorized-after trial motion. As such, this order became final upon entry, Rule 81.05, subject to review by this court upon a timely appeal. To be timely, the notice of appeal must be filed within ten days of the disposition of the motion. Rule 81.04. Dayringer v. Mullen, 651 S.W.2d 500, 502 (Mo.App. 1983). Because the husband’s notice of appeal was not filed until 25 days after the disposition of the wife’s motion, it is untimely, and this Court has no jurisdiction of this appeal. No leave for filing a late notice of appeal was requested or granted by this Court. Rule 81.07.

The appeal must be and is dismissed.

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

Related

King v. Sorensen
575 S.W.3d 239 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2018)
Kyle Sanford v. Centurytel of Missouri, LLC
Missouri Court of Appeals, 2015
State v. Casebolt
994 S.W.2d 114 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1999)
In Re the Marriage of Huey
716 S.W.2d 479 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
679 S.W.2d 431, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clayton-v-clayton-moctapp-1984.