"Incomplete" Grades in College Later Completed With Passing Grades Do Not Terminate Child Support Obligation

The Missouri Court of Appeals for the Western District of Missouri has recently held that Incompletes, later completed with passing grades, count as college credit hours under statute determining continuation of child support obligation past the age of 18 years. 
 

Generally, a parent's child support obligation terminates when the child reaches the age of eighteen.  However, f when a child reaches eighteen, ... the child is enrolled in an institution of vocational or higher education not later than October first following graduation from a secondary school or completion of a graduation equivalence degree program and so long as the child enrolls for and completes at least twelve hours of credit each semester ... at an institution of vocational or higher education and achieves grades sufficient to re-enroll at such institution, the parental support obligation shall continue until the child completes his or her education, or until the child reaches the age of twenty-one (twenty-two before August 2008), whichever first occurs.

To remain eligible for such continued parental support, at the beginning of each semester the child shall submit to each parent a transcript or similar official document provided by the institution of vocational or higher education which includes the courses the child is enrolled in and has completed for each term, the grades and credits received for each such course, and an official document from the institution listing the courses which the child is enrolled in for the upcoming term and the number of credits for each such course.

A child who is employed at least fifteen hours per week during the semester may take as few as nine credit hours per semester and remain eligible for child support so long as all other requirements of this subsection are complied with.

In the recent case of Wilkerson v. Wilkerson, the college student had two "incomplete" grades when the term ended and, therefore, she actually completed only seven hours during that semester.  However, she later completed the classes and received full credit for that particular semester, so the Court ruled that she met the statutory requirements completing the classes and the child support obligation continued.  Note however that the case of Lombardo v. Lombardo held that that a student who had failed courses could not meet the statutory requirements by merely enrolling and attending classes.

The Court in Wilkerson apparently viewed incomplete grades as temporarily incomplete.  However, there was no indication given as to how long a student would be given to complete the class, or when the child support would terminate in the event that the incomplete was not eventually completed.  

 

  

What California's Same Sex Marriage Law Means to Missourians

As most people know, the California Supreme Court recently ruled that the state's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.  So what does that mean for Missourians? 

  • In California, there were two statutes that said that a marriage is between a man and a woman, which was interpreted to prohibit same sex marriage.  The Supreme Court ruled those statutes to be unconstitutional under the California Constitution (not the federal).   It is now legal for same sex couples to marry in California.

 

  • Missouri is different.  In Missouri, rather than a statutory ban on same-sex marriage, we have a constitutional amendment (2004) that defines marriage as being only between a man and a woman, and marriages between same-sex couples are not recognized.  There is also a federal statute in play called the Federal Defense of Marriage Act which permits Missouri (and other states) to deny full faith and credit to the marriage laws of another state.  This means that Missouri does not have to recognize a same-sex marriage that is perfectly legal in California since it is inconsistent with Missouri law.  The federal law's constitutionality has not been fully challenged yet.

 

  • Taken together, it is presumed that if a same sex married couple moved to Missouri, or Missourians went to California to get married and returned to Missouri, their marriage would not be recognized.

 

  • This also means that same-sex married couples could not obtain a divorce in Missouri because there would be no jurisdiction for the courts.  Thus, dissolution of marriage laws that control child custody, visitation, support, maintenance, and property division would presumably not apply.

 

  • In the event of a separation the couple would probably have to file an action under the Uniform Parentage Act (commonly known as a paternity action currently) to determine custody, visitation, and child support issues if adopted children are involved.

 

  • Same sex couples may want to utilize prenuptial agreements, antenuptial agreements, contracts, and other documentation to control the disposition of assets, including real estate, personal property, bank accounts, securities, business interests, etc.

Source for Post:  mobar.org Esq. soundbite. 

Missouri Supreme Court Adopts New Requirements and Forms For Parties Not Represented by Counsel in Dissolution of Marriage, Paternity, Legal Separation, and Modification Proceedings

Effective yesterday, July 1, 2008, Supreme Court Rule 88.09 comes into effect which requires parties not represented by counsel to participate in a litigant awareness program that explains the risks and benefits of self representation, as well as requiring certain court forms to be used and accepted by the Court.   The amended rule reads as follows:

88.09 PARTIES NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL

Every party not represented by counsel who participates in a proceeding for dissolution of marriage, legal separation, parentage or the modification of a judgment in any such proceeding shall:

(a) Complete a litigant awareness program that includes an explanation of the risks and responsibilities of self-representation, unless waived by the circuit court. The awareness program shall be prepared by a committee designated by this Court, but each circuit may determine the manner and means by which the training shall be provided and the proof of compliance; and

(b) Unless such use is waived by the trial court, use the pleadings, forms, and proposed judgment prepared by a committee designated by this Court that have been approved by this Court. These forms shall be accepted by the courts of this state, until disapproved or superseded by this Court.

(c) Nothing in this Rule 88.09 prevents a court from determining the legal sufficiency of any pleading nor prevents a court from entering judgment in a form different from the judgment form approved pursuant to Rule 88.09(b).