Turley v. Turley

169 S.W.3d 559, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1238, 2005 WL 2007159
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 23, 2005·No. ED 85340·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Edward F. Turley (“Husband”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment denying his motion to modify spousal maintenance. The marriage of Husband and Eileen M. Turley (‘Wife”) was dissolved by a decree of dissolution of marriage entered on December 7, 2000 (“Decree”). On appeal, Husband asserts the trial court erred in denying his motion to modify because: (i) Wife failed to obtain gainful employment after three years; and (ii) a decrease in his salary constituted a change in circumstances justifying a modification of the Decree. We disagree and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and no error of law appears. The trial court’s judgment was supported by substantial evidence on the record. No precedential or jurisprudential purpose would be served by an opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the general principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Turley v. Turley, 169 S.W.3d 559, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1238, 2005 WL 2007159 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

169 S.W.3d 559 (Turley v. Turley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. O'BANNON
169 S.W.3d 559 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2005)