White v. Darrington, No. WD 59762.

CourtCourt of Appeal of Missouri (US)
Writing for the CourtJames M. Smart, Jr.
Citation91 S.W.3d 718
PartiesRichard D. WHITE, et al., Appellants, v. Chiquita DARRINGTON, et al., Plaintiffs, Wayne and Nancy DOE, Respondents.
Docket NumberNo. WD 59762.
Decision Date17 December 2002
91 S.W.3d 718
Richard D. WHITE, et al., Appellants,
Chiquita DARRINGTON, et al., Plaintiffs,
Wayne and Nancy DOE, Respondents.
No. WD 59762.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
December 17, 2002.

Page 719


Page 720

Richard D. White, Kansas City, MO, for Appellant

James G. Butler, Jr., Overland Park, KS, for Respondent



Richard D. White appeals the decision of the trial court dismissing his action invoking § 453.110, RSMo 2000. We affirm the decision of the trial court.

Statement of Facts

On March 6, 1999, Chiquita Darrington gave birth to a baby boy out of wedlock in Overland Park, Kansas. Darrington and the biological father, Richard D. White, have never been married and did not live together when the child was born. Darrington named the boy "Richard David White" after his father. Both Darrington and White were residents of Kansas City, Missouri, and continue to be residents of Missouri.

White visited Darrington at the hospital after the child was born. White refused to sign paternity papers at the hospital so that hospital personnel could prepare the birth certificate. While in the hospital, Darrington discussed with a Kansas adoption agency the possibility of placing the child up for adoption. White objected to the adoption. Darrington agreed to return to her home with the child.

On March 8, 1999, White drove Darrington and the child to Darrington's home in Kansas City, Missouri. White planned to return later and take custody of the child. Later that day Darrington contacted Chosen Child Adoption Agency, Inc., located in Tulsa, Oklahoma, concerning the possibility of adoption for the child. Chosen Child sent Darrington a plane ticket for the purpose of transporting the child to Oklahoma for adoption proceedings.

The next day, March 9, 1999, Darrington took the child to Tulsa to initiate adoption proceedings. That day, Darrington and the child appeared in the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma, and Darrington's parental rights were terminated by order of the court. Darrington, at first, fraudulently failed to disclose White as the putative father. White discovered Darrington's

Page 721

actions. He contacted Chosen Child to request that the child be returned to him in Missouri. On March 11, 1999, Chosen Child filed an amended application and notice naming Richard White as the biological father. On May 7, 1999, White filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the District Court of Tulsa, alleging paternity, objecting to the jurisdiction of the Oklahoma courts, and claiming violations of the statutes of Oklahoma and Missouri and the Federal Constitution. A writ of habeas corpus was issued to Chosen Child, and the District Court conducted hearings concerning the child and parental rights. On August 31, 1999, White's parental rights were terminated. White appealed to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, which upheld the District Court's decision on June 13, 2000. See White v. Adoption of Baby Boy D., 10 P.3d 212 (Okla.2000). The child was subsequently, in October 2001, adopted in Idaho by Wayne and Nancy Doe.

While the Idaho adoption proceeding was still pending, White elected to file in Jackson County, Missouri, a petition for custody and for investigation and report, pursuant to § 453.110 RSMo.1 The Does intervened. At a hearing on October 10, 2000, the court expressed doubt that it had subject matter jurisdiction to hear a case concerning custody of the child in Idaho. White and the Does submitted legal briefs to the court on this issue. A second hearing was held, and on March 5, 2001, the court denied White's petition for custody and investigation and report, deciding that there was no basis on which the court could grant White's petition for custody. White now appeals that decision.


White raises four points on appeal. Unfortunately, this court finds that no issues are preserved for appeal.

Missouri Supreme Court Rule 84.04(a)(2) states that "[t]he brief for appellant shall contain ... [a] concise statement of the grounds on which jurisdiction of the review court is invoked[.]" Rule 84.04(b) states that the "jurisdictional statement shall set forth sufficient factual data to demonstrate the applicability of the particular provision or provisions of Article V, section 3, of the Constitution whereon jurisdiction is sought to be predicated." Appellant's brief contains an insufficient jurisdictional statement:

This action is one involving the question of whether Missouri courts have jurisdiction to issue orders of custody of children being transferred from Missouri to another state for the purpose of being placed for adoption as provided by Section 453.110 RSMo and whether or not Missouri is required to give full faith and credit to judgments of a sister state(s) when the sister state(s) lack subject matter jurisdiction and when there is...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Curry Inv. Co. v. Santilli, WD 78899
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • June 28, 2016
    ...which to defer.”) (quoting All Am. Painting, LLC v. Fin. Sols. & Assocs., Inc., 315 S.W.3d 719, 723 (Mo. banc 2010) ); Dynamic Comput., 91 S.W.3d at 718 (When a party “fail[s] to file a timely answer to the ... request for admissions, ... that matter [i]s conclusively established and [i]s n......
  • Thompson v. Flagstar Bank, Fsb, SD 29866.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • November 23, 2009
    ...concludes that jurisdiction is proper, violating the prohibition against conclusory statements of Rule 84.04(b). See White v. Darrington, 91 S.W.3d 718, 722 Fourth, Appellants present this Court with a deficient statement of facts which violates Rule 84.04(c) in that it is not "a fair and c......
  • State v. Jackson, 25367.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • May 25, 2004
    ...84.04(b). This court is not required to search through court records to discover the basis for Appellant's appeal. White v. Darrington, 91 S.W.3d 718, 722 (Mo.App. Third, to amplify the deficiency in the jurisdictional statement, the procedural background related to the grounds for appeal i......
  • Anderson v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co., WD 64940.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • November 1, 2005
    ...jurisdiction is sought to be predicated." A deficient jurisdictional statement merits dismissing an appeal. White v. Darrington, Page 358 91 S.W.3d 718, 722 (Mo.App.2002). Anderson's jurisdictional statement contains no facts that indicate that jurisdiction is proper in this court. Anderson......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT