Stacy v. Stacy

Missouri Court of Appeals

Stacy v. Stacy

641 S.W.2d 452, 1982 Mo. App. LEXIS 3215

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 21, 1982

DocketNo. 45309

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 641 S.W.2d 452 (Stacy v. Stacy) 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

Stacy v. Stacy, 641 S.W.2d 452, 1982 Mo. App. LEXIS 3215 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

REINHARD, Presiding Judge.

Husband appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion to quash the garnish[453]*453ment in aid of execution that wife sought in order to collect almost $13,000.00 in past due child support payments. We affirm.

The parties were divorced on September 22, 1966. The decree of that date ordered husband to pay to wife $30.00 per week as child support. On July 16, 1981, wife filed her most recent request for execution and garnishment, and the writ was issued on July 27, 1981. On October 19, 1981, husband filed a motion to quash the execution and garnishment on the ground that the court’s 1966 order for child support was presumed paid under § 516.350, RSMo.1978. The court denied his motion, and husband appeals.

On appeal, husband contends the trial court erred in denying his motion because, pursuant to § 516.350, the order for child support is presumed paid. That section provides that any judgment, order, or decree is presumed paid at the expiration of 10 years unless, within the 10-year period, the judgment, order, or decree is revived or a payment is duly entered on the record. Husband argues that, because the trial court’s 1966 decree ordering him to pay child support was not revived and no payment was entered on the record, the child support is conclusively presumed paid.

In Holt v. Holt, 635 S.W.2d 335 (Mo.banc 1982), the Missouri Supreme Court considered and rejected the argument husband makes here. Applying the rule and reasoning announced in Holt, we find the trial court did not err in denying husband’s motion to quash.

Affirmed.

SNYDER and CRIST, JJ., concur.

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

REINHARD, Presiding Judge.

Husband appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion to quash the garnish[453]*453ment in aid of execution that wife sought in order to collect almost $13,000.00 in past due child support payments. We affirm.

The parties were divorced on September 22, 1966. The decree of that date ordered husband to pay to wife $30.00 per week as child support. On July 16, 1981, wife filed her most recent request for execution and garnishment, and the writ was issued on July 27, 1981. On October 19, 1981, husband filed a motion to quash the execution and garnishment on the ground that the court’s 1966 order for child support was presumed paid under § 516.350, RSMo.1978. The court denied his motion, and husband appeals.

On appeal, husband contends the trial court erred in denying his motion because, pursuant to § 516.350, the order for child support is presumed paid. That section provides that any judgment, order, or decree is presumed paid at the expiration of 10 years unless, within the 10-year period, the judgment, order, or decree is revived or a payment is duly entered on the record. Husband argues that, because the trial court’s 1966 decree ordering him to pay child support was not revived and no payment was entered on the record, the child support is conclusively presumed paid.

In Holt v. Holt, 635 S.W.2d 335 (Mo.banc 1982), the Missouri Supreme Court considered and rejected the argument husband makes here. Applying the rule and reasoning announced in Holt, we find the trial court did not err in denying husband’s motion to quash.

Affirmed.

SNYDER and CRIST, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

641 S.W.2d 452, 1982 Mo. App. LEXIS 3215, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stacy-v-stacy-moctapp-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack