From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goodrich v. Goodrich

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division One
Mar 7, 1984
667 S.W.2d 39 (Mo. Ct. App. 1984)

Opinion

No. 13097.

March 7, 1984.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT, PULASKI COUNTY, EUGENE E. NORTHERN, J.

Tyce S. Smith, Smith Muxlow, Waynesville, Dale H. Close, Richland, for appellant.

David Gregory Warren, Warren Warren, Richland, for respondent.


This action for dissolution of marriage was instituted by Florence Elaine Goodrich, petitioner below and respondent here, against her husband James Lee Goodrich, respondent below and appellant here.

Appellant's sole point is that the trial court erred in awarding respondent $7,500 as "lump sum, non-periodic maintenance" because, among other reasons, there was no substantial evidence to support the award.

The childless marriage was of three years' duration. Both parties were in good health and gainfully employed. The wife's income substantially exceeded that of the husband. The petition contained no prayer for an award of maintenance, and this court's review of the record discloses that the issue of maintenance was not tried by consent and there was no substantial evidence to support the making of the award. The contents of the decree make it clear that the trial court, in adjusting the property rights of the parties, took into consideration its award of maintenance. Since the award of maintenance must be set aside, fairness to the parties dictates that those portions of the decree purporting to deal with the disposition of property, both marital and non-marital, should also be set aside.

"The petition in a proceeding for dissolution of marriage . . . shall set forth: . . . [6] the relief sought." § 452.310.2(6), RSMo 1978.

Those portions of the decree which dissolved the marriage, restored petitioner's maiden name, and required the parties to pay their own attorneys, are hereby affirmed. All other portions of the decree are reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. It is so ordered.

GREENE, C.J., and TITUS and CROW, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Goodrich v. Goodrich

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division One
Mar 7, 1984
667 S.W.2d 39 (Mo. Ct. App. 1984)
Case details for

Goodrich v. Goodrich

Case Details

Full title:FLORENCE ELAINE GOODRICH, RESPONDENT, v. JAMES LEE GOODRICH, APPELLANT

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division One

Date published: Mar 7, 1984

Citations

667 S.W.2d 39 (Mo. Ct. App. 1984)

Citing Cases

Samuels v. Samuels

The wife acknowledges that waiver was tendered, but on condition that the court grant her the move to New…

Riley v. Riley

When a party has failed to ask for maintenance by an appropriate pleading in a dissolution proceeding, an…