Eakright v. Eakright

Missouri Court of Appeals

Eakright v. Eakright

689 S.W.2d 799, 1985 Mo. App. LEXIS 3294

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 9, 1985

DocketNo. WD35988

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 689 S.W.2d 799 (Eakright v. Eakright) 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

Eakright v. Eakright, 689 S.W.2d 799, 1985 Mo. App. LEXIS 3294 (Mo. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

DIXON, Judge.

The husband appeals from the circuit court order modifying the dissolution decree by awarding him custody of the two minor children. Wife had initially been granted custody and child support, but then filed for modification, requesting more child support and permission to move [800]*800the children to California. Husband later asked for a modification, requesting custody but not requesting child support. The court overruled wife’s motion and granted the husband’s, awarding him custody. Husband appeals, asserting the court erred in failing to award him child support.

The right of appeal is statutory. Section 512.020 RSMo 1979; Rule 81.01; Williams v. Williams, 480 S.W.2d 525 (Mo.App.1972). Fundamental to that right is that the party be aggrieved by the judgment from which he appeals. Armstrong v. Armstrong, 654 S.W.2d 802, 308 (Mo.App.1983). A party is not aggrieved when the court grants all of the relief sought. State ex rel. Green v. James, 355 Mo. 223, 195 S.W.2d 669 (banc 1946); Lowe v. Labor and Industrial Relations Comm’n, 594 S.W.2d 365 (Mo.App.1980); In re Marriage of Richardson, 540 S.W.2d 227 (Mo.App.1976); Lipsey v. Lipsey, 464 S.W.2d 529 (Mo.App.1971). See, Block v. Block, 593 S.W.2d 584 (Mo.App.1980). The appeal is dismissed.

All concur.

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

DIXON, Judge.

The husband appeals from the circuit court order modifying the dissolution decree by awarding him custody of the two minor children. Wife had initially been granted custody and child support, but then filed for modification, requesting more child support and permission to move [800]*800the children to California. Husband later asked for a modification, requesting custody but not requesting child support. The court overruled wife’s motion and granted the husband’s, awarding him custody. Husband appeals, asserting the court erred in failing to award him child support.

The right of appeal is statutory. Section 512.020 RSMo 1979; Rule 81.01; Williams v. Williams, 480 S.W.2d 525 (Mo.App.1972). Fundamental to that right is that the party be aggrieved by the judgment from which he appeals. Armstrong v. Armstrong, 654 S.W.2d 802, 308 (Mo.App.1983). A party is not aggrieved when the court grants all of the relief sought. State ex rel. Green v. James, 355 Mo. 223, 195 S.W.2d 669 (banc 1946); Lowe v. Labor and Industrial Relations Comm’n, 594 S.W.2d 365 (Mo.App.1980); In re Marriage of Richardson, 540 S.W.2d 227 (Mo.App.1976); Lipsey v. Lipsey, 464 S.W.2d 529 (Mo.App.1971). See, Block v. Block, 593 S.W.2d 584 (Mo.App.1980). The appeal is dismissed.

All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

689 S.W.2d 799, 1985 Mo. App. LEXIS 3294, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eakright-v-eakright-moctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack