Garvey v. Garvey
Decision Date | 02 October 1950 |
Docket Number | No. 21410,21410 |
Parties | GARVEY v. GARVEY. |
Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Ellis Beavers, Joe Beavers, Grant City, for appellant.
Joseph M. Garvey, St. Joseph, for respondent.
This is an appeal by plaintiff, Jean Garvey, from an order overruling her motion to modify a divorce decree which awarded her the custody of her infant child Nancy. The motion sought permission to take the child out of the State of Missouri.
Plaintiff and defendant were married November 30, 1946, and separated May 4, 1949, and plaintiff filed a petition for divorce on May 11 of the same year; Nancy was then five weeks old. On July 29 plaintiff was granted a divorce and awarded the custody of Nancy and the defendant was required to pay the sum of $40 a month for the support of the child and $10 a month by way of alimony; the decree also provided that the defendant should have the right to visit the child on all proper occasions and to have its custody from seven o'clock to nine o'clock two evenings each week and on Sundays from two o'clock to six o'clock p. m.
On August 30 defendant had plaintiff cited for contempt for failure to comply with the provisions of the decree granting him the privilege of visitation and the custody of the child at certain hours. After a hearing the court found plaintiff guilty of contempt but deferred sentence. Pending the contempt proceedings plaintiff and defendant each filed a motion to modify the decree concerning the custody of the child. Plaintiff's motion sought to restrict defendant's right to take their child from her home to once a week, on Sunday afternoon; defendant's motion requested the court to designate Tuesday and Thursday nights of each week as the nights of visitation. Plaintiff's motion was overruled and defendant's motion was sustained and the court modified the decree so that the defendant could have the right of visitation on Tuesday and Thursday nights of each week between the hours of seven and nine, and to have the custody of the child on Sunday afternoon between the hours of two and six. There was no appeal from this order. On November 10, 1949, plaintiff filed the motion now under consideration.
At the conclusion of the evidence the court made certain findings which are so abundantly supported by the evidence and the law, that we copy such findings:
'This application is by plaintiff for permission to take the minor child of plaintiff and defendant from the State of Missouri.
'The removal of the child from the state will not be denied if the best interests of the child would be served thereby.
'Plaintiff is shown to be a competent secretary and office supervisor and is offered such position in other states.
'She states she was referred by an employment agency to two positions here which would have paid approximately $125 to $140 per month but that she did not interview the prospective employers and that she was not ready to go to work at that time.
'Mr. Glenn, of the Platt-Gard College testified that there were numerous vacancies (in St. Joseph, Missouri,) for employees qualified as plaintiff is, and that salaries for such positions would range approximately from $175 to $200 per month; also that there were vacancies for secretaries with salaries ranging approximately from $135 to $150 per month.
'Plaintiff states that in Waterloo, Iowa, she could obtain employment at about $51 per week.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
L v. N
...adultery.'12 Sections 452.070 and 452.110, RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S.; McCoy v. Briegel, Mo.App., 305 S.W.2d 29, 35(7); Garvey v. Garvey, Mo.App., 233 S.W.2d 48, 50(1); Morgens v. Morgens, Mo.App., 164 S.W.2d 626, 632(2); Salkey v. Salkey, Mo.App., 80 S.W.2d 735, 739(2).13 Shepard v. Shepard, Mo.A......
-
Graves v. Wooden
...controlling importance [Pope v. Pope, Mo.App., 267 S.W.2d 340, 343(3); Mayo v. Mayo, Mo.App., 244 S.W.2d 415, 416(1); Garvey v. Garvey, Mo.App., 233 S.W.2d 48, 50(2)] and to determine whether the moving party, in this instance defendant, has carried his burden of showing by a preponderance ......
-
Hurley v. Hurley
...controlling importance [Pope v. Pope, Mo.App., 267 S.W.2d 340, 343(3); Mayo v. Mayo, Mo.App., 244 S.W.2d 415, 416(1); Garvey v. Garvey, Mo.App., 233 S.W.2d 48, 50(2)] and to determine whether the moving party, in this instance plaintiff, has carried his burden of showing by a preponderance ......
-
Richards v. Hayes
...and controlling importance.' Pope v. Pope, Mo.App., 267 S.W.2d 340, 343; Mayo v. Mayo, Mo.App., 244 S.W.2d 415, 416; Garvey v. Garvey, Mo.App., 233 S.W.2d 48, 50; Clark v. Clark, Mo.App., 306 S.W.2d 641; I_____ v. B_____, Mo.App., 305 S.W.2d 713[7, It is next contended by appellant that the......