Eickelmann v. Eickelmann
| Decision Date | 23 December 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. WD,WD |
| Parties | John J. EICKELMANN, Appellant, v. Suzann G. EICKELMANN, Respondent. 38651. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
H. Ralph Gaw, Crews, Gaw & Pyle, Tipton, for appellant.
Timothy R. Cisar, Loraine & Cisar, Lake Ozark, for respondent.
Before GAITAN, P.J., and TURNAGE and MANFORD, JJ.
John J. Eickelmann, sought a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction prohibiting his ex-wife, Suzann G. Eickelmann, from removing their minor children from Missouri. The trial court granted the temporary restraining order. After a hearing with both parties present, the trial court quashed the temporary restraining order, denied the preliminary injunction, and assessed damages on the injunction bond. In two points on appeal, John maintains that the trial court erroneously denied the preliminary injunction and wrongfully awarded damages on the injunction bond.
Dismissed in part and affirmed in part.
The decree dissolving the Eickelmanns' marriage awarded primary custody of their three minor children to Suzann and granted John visitation rights. John alleged that Suzann took the children to live in Florida in violation of § 452.377, RSMo Cum.Supp.1984, which requires the custodial parent to obtain either a court order or the non-custodial parent's written permission before removing minor children from Missouri. While Suzann and the children were visiting in Missouri, John filed a motion to modify the custody decree in the original dissolution action and a motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction in a separate case.
The trial court issued the temporary restraining order on August 7, 1986, after John posted a $500 cash bond. On August 15, 1986, with both parties present and represented by counsel, the trial court held a hearing on the preliminary injunction and quashed the same. The court awarded Suzann $300 for attorney fees.
In his first point, John argues that the trial court erred in summarily denying his application for preliminary injunction. Although appealability was not briefed by either party, orders entered during the temporary injunction stage are not final, appealable orders. C.M. Brown & Associates, Inc. v. King, 662 S.W.2d 572, 573 (Mo.App.1983). No appeal lies from the denial of a preliminary injunction. Pomirko v. Sayad, 693 S.W.2d 323, 324 (Mo.App.1985). Therefore,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Furniture Mfg. Corp. v. Joseph
...granting, denying, or dissolving a preliminary injunction or from any other merely interlocutory order or decree. Eickelmann v. Eickelmann, 724 S.W.2d 261, 262 (Mo.App.1986); 4 C.J.S. Appeal and Error § 144 (1993). Missouri does have a statutory provision which allows an appeal from any ord......
-
State ex rel. Myers Memorial Airport Committee, Inc. v. City of Carthage
...temporary injunction stage are not final orders, thus no appeal lies from the denial of a preliminary injunction. Eickelmann v. Eickelmann, 724 S.W.2d 261, 262 (Mo.App.1986); C.M. Brown & Associates, Inc. v. King, 662 S.W.2d 572, 573 (Mo.App.1983); Simms v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 605 S.W.2d......
-
Hagen v. Bank of Piedmont
...temporary injunction stage are not final orders, thus no appeal lies from the denial of a preliminary injunction. Eickelmann v. Eickelmann, 724 S.W.2d 261, 262 (Mo.App.1986); C.M. Brown & Associates, Inc. v. King, 662 S.W.2d 572, 573 (Mo.App.1983); Simms v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 605 S.W.2d......
-
Leone v. Leone
...a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction is interlocutory only and is not an appealable judgment. Eickelmann v. Eickelmann, 724 S.W.2d 261, 262 (Mo.App.1986); Londoff Village Rehabilitation Project v. Land Reutilization Authority of St. Louis, 720 S.W.2d 372, 372-73 (Mo.App......