Recent Missouri case:  On a motion to modify (reduce) maintenance, evidence of a substantial and continuing change included “detailed evidence” of Movant Husband’s stroke-induced disability and reduced income, and no evidence of an increase in Wife’s income was necessary.

The trial court: (1) did not abuse its discretion in dismissing ex-wife’s motion to dismiss under Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 67.03 because the facts showed that ex-Husband was unable to comply with the existing maintenance order following his stroke; (2) did not err in granting ex-husband’s motion to modify maintenance, because he met his burden to show a change in circumstances so substantial and continuing as to make the original maintenance order unreasonable; and (3) did not abuse its discretion in awarding ex-wife only a partial amount of attorney’s fees.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District – ED104502