Welday v. Welday
| Decision Date | 13 July 1921 |
| Docket Number | No. 17354.,17354. |
| Citation | 232 S.W. 1045 |
| Parties | WELDAY v. WELDAY. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Franklin County; R. A. Breuer, Judge.
"Not to be officially published."
Suit by Julia C. Welday against Louis D. Welday for divorce, motion for alimony pendente lite, and attorney's fees, pending appeal by the husband from decree for plaintiff. From an order and judgment allowing alimony and attorney's fees, the husband appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions.
James Booth, of Pacific, Jesse M. Owen, of Union, and Jesse H. Schaper, of Washington, Mo., for appellant.
W. L. Cole and D. W. Breid, both of Union, for respondent.
This is an appeal from an order and judgment of the circuit court of Franklin county allowing plaintiff $500 alimony and attorney's fees, pending the appeal in this court in the case of Welday v. Welday, 232 S. W. 1042, decided at this term.
It appears that the appeal in the divorce suit was granted on the 4th day of August, 1920. The judgment for alimony pendente lite and attorney's fees in the sum of $500 was rendered on August 11th following, and during the same term of court, but after the appeal had been granted in the divorce suit. Defendant appealed from this order and judgment.
Instead of filing separate transcripts in each case, only one transcript was filed, and the plaintiff has briefed both cases together.
Defendant makes the point in this court on appeal that the trial court was without jurisdiction to render judgment for alimony pendente lite and attorney's fees to prosecute the appeal, because the appeal had been taken from the judgment in the divorce proceedings seven days before the motion was filed and judgment had thereon allowing the alimony pending the suit.
This same proposition was recently before this court in the case of State ex rel. Kranke v. Calhoun, 227 S. W. 1080, in which it was held that the trial court had jurisdiction to hear and determine a motion for alimony pendente lite and suit money pending the appeal. That case was certified to the Supreme Court as being contrary to the decisions of the Kansas City Court of Appeals in Lewis v. Lewis, 20 Mo. App. 546, and Hartwig v. Hartwig, 142 S. W. 800. The Supreme Court adopted the opinion of this court in the very recent case of State ex rel. Kranke v. Calhoun et al. (No. 22893) 232 S. W.1038, not yet officially reported.
Following the rule as announced in State ex rel. Kranke v. Calhoun, supra, this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Glass v. Glass
... ... State ex rel. Kranke v ... Calhoun, 206 Mo.App. 298, 27 S.W. 1080, opinion affirmed ... in the Supreme Court en banc, 232 S.W. 1038; Welday v ... Welday, 232 S.W. 1045; Weisheyer v. Weisheyer, ... 14 S.W.2d 486, affirmed on certiorari in the Supreme ... Court, State ex rel. Weisheyer ... ...
-
Jones v. Jones, 26069.
...suit money pending the appeal. State ex rel. v. Calhoun, Mo.Sup., 232 S.W. 1038, affirming 206 Mo.App. 298, 227 S.W. 1080; Welday v. Welday, Mo.App., 232 S.W. 1045; Glass v. Glass, 226 Mo.App. 78, 39 S.W.2d 816; Drennan v. Drennan, Mo. App., 104 S.W.2d The taking of the appeal in a divorce ......
-
Welday v. Welday
...Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions to dismiss petition and cross-bill. See, also, 232 S. W. 1045. James Booth, of Pacific, Jesse M. Owen, of Union, and Jesse H. Schaper, of Washington, Mo., for W. L. Cole and D. W. Breid, both of Union, for......