The State Line Lawyer

I’ve notice that I’ve gotten a lot of traffic over the past few days regarding child support obligations, in particular the modification of such obligations. I figured it is worthwhile to post a link to the relevant statutes: Title 30 of the Revised Statutes. I direct these readers to Chapters 452 (452.340) and 454.

– ksmolawyer

Under Missouri law, parents must provide for their minor children. And if the child is continuously enrolled in an institution of vocational or higher education by the October following high school graduation, this obligation continues. Continous enrollment has been interpreted broadly as to encourage the pursuit of higher education. 

Recently, the Missouri Court of Appeals got a chance to further define what is continuous regarding vocational schools. In this case, the father was obligated to make child support payments to his ex-wife, the mother. The term of these child support payments were effectively extended by the child upon his enrollment in a local vo-tech. After completing a 60 week course for a HVAC diploma, the child did not enroll in the school’s next ten week session, which began December 4, 2006. The child did, however, enroll in the ten week session beginning February 12, 2007. Thus, the child was effectively not in school for 10 weeks. The father claimed that this failure to enroll terminated his child support obligations.

The court reasoned that because the vocational school did not adopt a typical semester format with corresponding summer and winter breaks, the court could imply from the legislature’s “obvious intent . . . to treat vocational and college education equally” that the child’s failure to enroll was the equivalent of such a summer or winter break.

– ksmolawyer

The Missouri Court of Appeals recently held that absent an express agreement otherwise maintenance (alimony) payments terminate upon the recipient’s remarriage. The Court went on to hold that the use of the word “only” was insufficient to show this express agreement. See the opinion here.

In this case, husband and wife divorced in October of 2003. The judgment included a provision requiring the husband to pay his former wife periodic, modifiable maintenance of $500 per month. This maintenance arrangement was later amended by the parties. As part of this stipulation, the parties stated that “The maintenance obligation herein should terminate upon [the wife's] death.” The lower court’s modified judgment setting forth the stipulation stated, “Said maintenance obligation shall only terminate upon the death of [the wife] or September 30, 2011, which occurs first.” (emphasis added).

The wife remarried thereafter, and husband filed a motion to terminate his maintenance obligation. The Court noted that Section 452.370.3 provides in relevant part, “Unless otherwise agreed in writing or expressly provided in the judgment, the obligation to pay future statutory maintenance is terminated upon the death or either party or the remarriage of the party receiving maintenance.” Based on its interpretation and judicial precedent, the Court held, “[I]n order to rebut the statutory presumption that maintenance terminates upon the receiving spouse’s remarriage, a dissolution decree must expressly refer to the receiving spouse’s possible future remarriage, and must expressly provide that maintenance payments shall continue beyond that contingency.”

Thus, at least in Missouri, parties to a divorce, working with their attorneys, must carefully draft separation and maintenance agreements to capture the parties’ wishes. In particular, if the parties wish that maintenance payments will continue indefinitely or for sometime after the recipient’s remarriage, the parties must state this fact by expressly referencing remarriage and describing its consequences.

– ksmolawyer