Buchanan v. Graf
| Decision Date | 15 May 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 45947,45947 |
| Citation | Buchanan v. Graf, 671 S.W.2d 379 (Mo. App. 1984) |
| Parties | Benjamin A. BUCHANAN and Brenda F. Buchanan, Appellants, v. Marilyn K. GRAF, et al., Respondents. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Gerald J. Bamberger, St. Charles, for appellants.
Leland Smith, II, St. Charles, for Marilyn Graf.
Allen J. Bloom, Clayton, for Sears Roebuck.
Creditor of former husband, David Graf, seeks to quiet title and partition marital residence of David Graf and defendant Marilyn K. Graf. The essential parties were the creditor who purchased the former husband's interest in the real estate at a sheriff's execution sale and the debtor husband's former wife. Additional parties defendant were the holder of a purchase money note and deed of trust and subsequent judgment creditors of David Graf. The former husband is not a party. In this court tried case the trial court dismissed the petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff creditor appeals the dismissal claiming error only as to questions of law.
The stipulated facts are these. In 1977 David and Marilyn Graf purchased a house in St. Charles County, Missouri and gave a purchase money note and deed of trust to defendant Gershman Investment Company. The deeds were recorded. On January 30, 1981, the Graf's marriage was dissolved in St. Charles County. The dissolution court found as a fact that the real estate had a value of $55,000 and was subject to a balance on the note and deed of trust of $24,000. The court entered the following order as part of the decree of dissolution:
The court orders that the petitioner [wife] shall be allowed to remain in the marital residence located at #24 Westwinds, St. Peters, Missouri, until such time as the youngest child, Dawn Graf, attains the age of eighteen (18) years; and, at such time as said child attains the age of eighteen (18) years the marital residence shall be sold and the proceeds divided one-half each to petitioner and respondent after costs of sale and mortgage indebtedness has been paid. Until such time as the sale of the marital residence occurs, the court orders that the petitioner be liable for the mortgage payment of One Hundred Ninety-Three Dollars ($193.00) per month and any utilities incurred during her residency in the marital home, and, both parties shall share equally in all taxes and insurance, one-half each. Petitioner shall not be accountable to respondent for rent nor waste committed on the property unless intentional.
Dawn Graf was eight years of age at the time of the dissolution. She was born April 11, 1973.
Plaintiff Buchanan obtained a St. Charles County judgment of $7,419.29 against David Graf on May 14, 1980. Buchanan purchased David Graf's interest in the subject real estate at a sheriff's execution sale on June 19, 1981. A sheriff's deed dated June 29, 1981 was recorded on July 7, 1981.
Defendant Marilyn Graf continues to exercise her right to reside in the home and has paid the note payments, taxes and insurance.
By the partition Buchanan alleges that David and Marilyn Graf were awarded undivided one-half interests as tenants in common by the decree of dissolution and that he acquired David Graf's interest under the sheriff's execution deed. Defendant Marilyn Graf, by answer, admits "... that an undivided one-half interest in common was all that Marilyn Graf was awarded." In Count I the court was asked to determine that David Graf has no interest in the real estate and to determine the interest of plaintiff Buchanan, defendants Marilyn K. Graf, the holder of the recorded deed of trust and subsequent judgment creditors of David Graf. Count II requests an order of partition in accordance with the respective rights of the parties as determined by the court in Count I.
The trial court concluded that as a matter of law the jurisdiction to determine ownership in the Graf's marital residence remained in the Graf v. Graf dissolution proceeding. It relied on Corder v. Corder, 546 S.W.2d 798 (Mo.App.1977); In re Marriage of Buthod, 624 S.W.2d 119 (Mo.App.1981); and State of Missouri ex rel. Brewer v. Sheehan, 565 S.W.2d 850 (Mo.App.1978).
In this court tried case with stipulated facts the only question before this court is whether the trial court drew the proper legal conclusion. Schroeder v. Horack, 592 S.W.2d 742, 744 (Mo. banc 1979). No deference is due the trial court's judgment where resolution of the controversy is a question of law. MFA Mutual Insurance Company v. Home Mutual Insurance Company, 629 S.W.2d 447, 450 (Mo.App.1981).
We first observe that the dissolution decree in Graf entered an order affecting the marital home. Our decision in State of Missouri ex rel. Brewer v. Sheehan, 565 S.W.2d 850 (Mo.App.1978) is therefore inapposite. We there found that the dissolution court declined to enter any order disposing of the marital residence and held that the wife was entitled to prohibition against her former husband's attempt to partition in a separate proceeding. In Graf v. Graf there was a decree provision dividing the marital home. It awarded a one-half interest to each party, subject to the wife's exclusive use until the youngest child...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Grunden v. Nelson
...(Mo.App.1974). Cases decided since enactment of the Dissolution of Marriage Act of 1974 have reached the same result. In Buchanan v. Graf, 671 S.W.2d 379 (Mo.App.1984), a decree of dissolution allowed the wife to remain in the marital home until the youngest child attained the age of 18 at ......
-
Estate of Ingram v. Rollins
...Inc. v. Director of Revenue, 824 S.W.2d 914, 916 (Mo. banc 1992). No deference is due the lower court's judgment. See Buchanan v. Graf, 671 S.W.2d 379, 381 (Mo.App.1984). The legal principle is firmly established that the operative effect of an order lies in the order or decretal portion it......
-
Migar Enterprises, Inc. v. DeMent, WD
...of Mediation, 689 S.W.2d 51, 54-5 (Mo. banc 1985); Taylor v. City of Pagedale, 746 S.W.2d 576, 577-78 (Mo.App.1987); Buchanan v. Graf, 671 S.W.2d 379, 381 (Mo.App.1984). At the conclusion of the court tried non-jury case the trial court rendered judgment for the defendant without any findin......
-
Handshear v. Handshear, 54909
...to provisions when sale must occur. This court has approved and affirmed decrees in substantially the same form. In Buchanan v. Graf, 671 S.W.2d 379 (Mo.App.1984), we upheld the validity of a dissolution decree which granted wife exclusive use of a marital residence for herself and children......