In re the Marriage of Newman

Missouri Court of Appeals

In re the Marriage of Newman

601 S.W.2d 632, 1980 Mo. App. LEXIS 2591

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 10, 1980

DocketNo. 11459

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 601 S.W.2d 632 (In re the Marriage of Newman) 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

In re the Marriage of Newman, 601 S.W.2d 632, 1980 Mo. App. LEXIS 2591 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

PREWITT, Judge:

Husband appeals from an order of the trial court granting to the wife temporary awards of maintenance, child support and attorneys fees and granting husband visitation privileges with the children of the parties. The order was designated “as a final judgment for purposes of appeal”. Appellant claims that the allowances for temporary maintenance, child support, and attorneys fees are excessive based on his ability to pay the awards. He also complains of only being allowed to visit the children, ages two and three, in the home of the maternal grandparents, where his wife now lives.

Our examination of the record convinces us that no error of law appears and that the order appealed from is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. The trial court has broad discretion in making such temporary orders and the burden of demonstrating an abuse of such discretion is upon the complaining party. In re Marriage of Deatherage, 595 S.W.2d 36, 40 (Mo. App.1980). Under our limited scope of review, stated in Murphy v. Carrón, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976), we cannot say that this discretion was abused.

Having determined that the order should be affirmed and that an opinion would have no precedential value, an expeditious disposal of this appeal is desirable so that this cause may proceed toward a final determination. We think the use of a memorandum opinion as provided in Rule 84.16(b), V.A.M.R., is appropriate and we affirm in compliance with that rule.

Appellant’s Motion to Strike Appellant’s Reply Brief, which was taken with the case, is overruled.

The order providing for temporary visitation and allowances is affirmed.

All concur.

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

PREWITT, Judge:

Husband appeals from an order of the trial court granting to the wife temporary awards of maintenance, child support and attorneys fees and granting husband visitation privileges with the children of the parties. The order was designated “as a final judgment for purposes of appeal”. Appellant claims that the allowances for temporary maintenance, child support, and attorneys fees are excessive based on his ability to pay the awards. He also complains of only being allowed to visit the children, ages two and three, in the home of the maternal grandparents, where his wife now lives.

Our examination of the record convinces us that no error of law appears and that the order appealed from is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. The trial court has broad discretion in making such temporary orders and the burden of demonstrating an abuse of such discretion is upon the complaining party. In re Marriage of Deatherage, 595 S.W.2d 36, 40 (Mo. App.1980). Under our limited scope of review, stated in Murphy v. Carrón, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976), we cannot say that this discretion was abused.

Having determined that the order should be affirmed and that an opinion would have no precedential value, an expeditious disposal of this appeal is desirable so that this cause may proceed toward a final determination. We think the use of a memorandum opinion as provided in Rule 84.16(b), V.A.M.R., is appropriate and we affirm in compliance with that rule.

Appellant’s Motion to Strike Appellant’s Reply Brief, which was taken with the case, is overruled.

The order providing for temporary visitation and allowances is affirmed.

All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

601 S.W.2d 632, 1980 Mo. App. LEXIS 2591, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-marriage-of-newman-moctapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack