Nenninger ex rel. Kievit v. Nenninger

Missouri Court of Appeals

Nenninger ex rel. Kievit v. Nenninger

789 S.W.2d 62, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 332, 1990 WL 19647

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 6, 1990

DocketNo. WD 42266

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 789 S.W.2d 62 (Nenninger ex rel. Kievit v. Nenninger) 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

Nenninger ex rel. Kievit v. Nenninger, 789 S.W.2d 62, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 332, 1990 WL 19647 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Pro se defendant and putative father in paternity case appeals trial court’s penden-te lite order awarding custody of 16-month old child to mother.

We hold that the trial court’s pendente lite custody order was not a final judgment. It was therefore not appealable. Section 512.020, RSMo 1986.

Pendente lite orders awarding child support, maintenance and attorneys' fees in dissolution cases have been held to be ap-pealable final judgments, see Bradley v. Bradley, 295 S.W.2d 592, 595 (Mo.App.1956), on the rationale of State ex rel. Gercke v. Seddon, 93 Mo. 520, 6 S.W. 342, 343 (1887). See also, Richardson v. Richardson, 524 S.W.2d 149, 153 (Mo.App.1975). Temporary child custody awards, on the other hand, are held to be not final for purposes of appeal. Haldeman v. Haldeman, 685 S.W.2d 570, 571-72 (Mo.App.1984); Femmer v. Femmer, 669 S.W.2d 63 (Mo.App.1984); Dorris v. Dorris, 623 S.W.2d 47, 48 (Mo.App.1981); Raines v. Raines, 590 S.W.2d 117, 118 (Mo.App.1979); Raines v. Raines, 567 S.W.2d 459, 460 (Mo.App.1978); Lipschitz v. Smith, 459 S.W.2d 17, 18 (Mo.App.1970).

Appeal dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Pro se defendant and putative father in paternity case appeals trial court’s penden-te lite order awarding custody of 16-month old child to mother.

We hold that the trial court’s pendente lite custody order was not a final judgment. It was therefore not appealable. Section 512.020, RSMo 1986.

Pendente lite orders awarding child support, maintenance and attorneys' fees in dissolution cases have been held to be ap-pealable final judgments, see Bradley v. Bradley, 295 S.W.2d 592, 595 (Mo.App.1956), on the rationale of State ex rel. Gercke v. Seddon, 93 Mo. 520, 6 S.W. 342, 343 (1887). See also, Richardson v. Richardson, 524 S.W.2d 149, 153 (Mo.App.1975). Temporary child custody awards, on the other hand, are held to be not final for purposes of appeal. Haldeman v. Haldeman, 685 S.W.2d 570, 571-72 (Mo.App.1984); Femmer v. Femmer, 669 S.W.2d 63 (Mo.App.1984); Dorris v. Dorris, 623 S.W.2d 47, 48 (Mo.App.1981); Raines v. Raines, 590 S.W.2d 117, 118 (Mo.App.1979); Raines v. Raines, 567 S.W.2d 459, 460 (Mo.App.1978); Lipschitz v. Smith, 459 S.W.2d 17, 18 (Mo.App.1970).

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

789 S.W.2d 62, 1990 Mo. App. LEXIS 332, 1990 WL 19647, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nenninger-ex-rel-kievit-v-nenninger-moctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack