Hodgins v. Hodgins, WD
| Decision Date | 10 September 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. WD,WD |
| Citation | 814 S.W.2d 710 |
| Parties | Ardine Janet HODGINS (now Scott), Appellant, v. Donald Edward HODGINS, Respondent. 43582. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Mark Edward Maddux, Springfield, for appellant.
John Thomas Gunther, Kansas City, for respondent.
Before FENNER, P.J., LOWENSTEIN, C.J., and ULRICH, J.
Appellant, Ardine Janet Hodgins (now Scott and hereinafter referred to as Mrs. Scott) appeals the Order of the trial court fixing respondent, Donald E. Hodgins' child support arrearage.
Mrs. Scott and Mr. Hodgins were married on June 2, 1967, and divorced on August 21, 1978, by order of the Circuit Court of Jackson County. There was one child, Robert Kenneth Hodgins (Robert), born of the marriage of the parties, on July 23, 1970. In the dissolution Mrs. Scott was awarded custody of Robert and Mr. Hodgins was ordered to pay child support in the amount of $50 per week, beginning on August 25, 1978. There is no dispute that Robert became emancipated on June 4, 1989, and Mrs. Scott makes no claim for child support after that date.
After dissolution of their marriage, several actions were undertaken to attempt to secure payment of Mr. Hodgins' support obligation. In 1981, while Mr. Hodgins was living in Sedgwick County, Kansas, the first of three separate actions under the Uniform Reciprocal Support Enforcement Act (URESA) was brought against him. The Sedgwick County court set Mr. Hodgins' child support obligation at $155 per month, which was a variation from the $50 per week child support obligation as established in the dissolution decree. A second URESA action was brought against Mr. Hodgins in 1984 and a third in 1988, both in Sedgwick County. Mr. Hodgins' child support obligation, as established by the Sedgwick County court, remained at $155 throughout the URESA proceedings.
On August 15, 1989, Mrs. Scott filed the motion from which this appeal arises, in the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri, seeking to have Mr. Hodgins cited for contempt, alleging non-payment of child support. After hearing evidence, the trial court entered the order of May 30, 1990, from which this appeal is taken.
In its order of May 30, 1990, the trial court rejected Mrs. Scott's evidence as to Mr. Hodgins' child support arrearage and based its finding upon the support obligation of $155 per month as established in the Kansas URESA proceeding. Judgment was entered for Mrs. Scott and against Mr. Hodgins accordingly, in the amount of $7,325.00 for past due child support and interest up to March 31, 1990 in the amount of $3,295.45.
In her sole point on appeal, Mrs. Scott argues that the trial court erred by calculating Mr. Hodgins' back child support based on the child support obligation of $155 per month as established in the URESA proceeding before the Sedgwick County, Kansas court.
A defendant in an URESA action can be required to pay a greater or lesser amount of child support than that required to be paid in an underlying...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
White-Nathan v. Nathan
...a greater or lesser amount of child support than that imposed by the underlying dissolution decree or support order. Hodgins v. Hodgins, 814 S.W.2d 710, 711 (Mo.App.1991); Thompson, 366 N.W.2d at 847. However, RURESA section 31 A support order made by a court of this state pursuant to this ......
-
State ex rel. Leo v. Tuthill
...to one must be credited against payments accruing or accrued under the other for the same period or periods."); Hodgins v. Hodgins, 814 S.W.2d 710, 711 (Mo.App.1991) (addressing URESA: "A defendant in an URESA action can be required to pay a greater or lesser amount of child support than th......
-
Gallup v. Gallup
...Paul, 439 S.W.2d 746, 750 (Mo. banc 1969); Consiglio v. Dept. of Social Services, 863 S.W.2d 665, 667 (Mo.App.1993); Hodgins v. Hodgins, 814 S.W.2d 710, 711 (Mo.App.1991); Loveland v. Henry, 700 S.W.2d 846, 850 (Mo.App.1985); Olson v. Olson, 534 S.W.2d 526, 529 (Mo.App.1976). Such a variati......
-
Consiglio v. Missouri Dept. of Social Services, Div. of Child Support Enforcement
...the obligor to pay child support in an amount greater or less than the amount ordered in the underlying decree. Hodgins v. Hodgins, 814 S.W.2d 710, 711 (Mo.App.1991). However, any variations made by the URESA court will not alter the support obligation under the original decree. Id.; See al......