BusinessDissolution by Affidavit - Personal Appearance Not Required

Dissolution by Affidavit – Personal Appearance Not Required

-

- Advertisment -spot_img

The elimination of the requirement of personal appearance for hearing in Missouri dissolution of marriage actions arose out of, what may be termed in its broadest sense, a prisoner’s civil rights action.

In State ex rel. Kittrell v. Carr, 878 S.W.2d 859 (Mo. App. 1994), the Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, addressed the issue of whether a personal appearance for hearing is necessary to obtain a Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage. 

The appellant in that case was an inmate in custody of the Missouri Department of Corrections whose petition for Dissolution of Marriage was dismissed for his failure to appear for a hearing after his wife’s default. 

The inmate’s spouse had been served, but failed to file any responsive pleading, and was in default. There were no children and the petitioner had waived his rights to any property that could be considered marital property. The inmate moved for a default judgment which was denied. 

The case was set for hearing and dismissed by the court when the petitioner failed to appear, the court having previously denied the inmate’s petition for writ of habeas corpus to testify.

The inmate thereafter filed a petitioner for a writ of mandamus with the court of appeals to require the circuit court to enter a judgment of dissolution in his case. His petition alleged that the circuit court had denied him meaningful access to the courts by dismissing his petition. 

After a brief discussion regarding prisoners’ rights to meaningful access to the courts and the judicial system, they concluded that a personal appearance at a default hearing is unnecessary. The court reasoned that, by failing to file any response or defend the action after being duly served, wife had admitted the traversable allegations of the petition. 

The court held that procedures for obtaining a default judgment in civil actions under Rules 74.04 (Summary Judgment) and 74.05 (Default Judgment) of the Missouri Supreme Court Rules are equally available for use in actions for dissolution of marriage. 

Although Rule 74.05 would not, standing alone, permit default judgments in cases involving division of property due to the necessity of proving value, and would never be appropriate to determine child custody or support, the court held that there would be no impediment to judgment where neither property, nor child custody or support are at issue.

Despite the protest of the lower court, the appellate court stated “Although a personal appearance and live witnesses may at one time have been a prerequisite to issuance of a dissolution decree, we find no such absolute requirement in the dissolution statutes as they are presently constituted.” Id. at 863.

Accordingly, although requirements may vary, between counties and individual judges. Dissolution of Marriage is available in many cases without either party ever appearing in court.

 Disclaimer:  The contents of this site, such as text, graphics, images, and other materials contained on the page are for general information purposes only. This article is not a substitute for professional advice on the topics mentioned. This article does not create any form of offers to any legal or professional service. The site assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions in the contents. In no event shall the site be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or incidental damages or any damages whatsoever, whether in an action to follow the content, negligence or other tort, arising out of the use of the contents of the article. The blog reserves the right to make additions, deletions, or modifications to the contents at any time without prior notice. The site does not warrant that the site is free of viruses or other harmful components. It may contain views and opinions which are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any other author, agency, organization, employer or company, including the site itself. It also does not provide professional advice, diagnosis, treatment or any legal service. The site does not endorse official procedures, legal actions or qualified services and the use of its contents are solely at your own risk.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Latest news

Divorce & Health Insurance

Recently, I had a question from someone who was going through a divorce and was concerned about lost health...

Divorce & Health Insurance

Recently, I had a question from someone who was going through a divorce and was concerned about lost health...

Dissolution by Affidavit – Personal Appearance Not Required

The elimination of the requirement of personal appearance for hearing in Missouri dissolution of marriage actions arose out of,...

Discover The Nine Vital Questions You Need To Ask Before Hiring Your Personal Injury Lawyer

Once you know the right questions to ask, hiring your personal injury lawyer is not only easy, but you...
- Advertisement -spot_imgspot_img

Disciplining And Firing Employees

Perception is Reality – Discipline with Care! Disciplining and firing employees is one of the most crucial areas for consideration...

Dental And Medical Collection Legal Guidelines

Every medical and dental practice has to deal with patients who do not pay. If it doesn't deal with...

Must read

Deeds of Variation – Are They Justified?

Deciding to make a Will and then actually putting...

Courtroom FEA: But how does FEA work?

Many legal professionals are exposed to Finite Element Analysis...
- Advertisement -spot_imgspot_img

You might also likeRELATED
Recommended to you