In re the Marriage of Lindenfelser

In Re the MARRIAGE of Marian Josephine LINDENFELSER and Dale Arnold Lindenfelser, Marian Josephine Lindenfelser, Petitioner-Respondent, and Dale Arnold Lindenfelser, Respondent-Appellant

In re the Marriage of Lindenfelser, 596 S.W.2d 71 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980)

Court: Missouri Court of Appeals · State Appellate Courts
Decided: March 4, 1980
Docket: No. 11218
Judges: Prewitt, Flanigan, Houser
Citations: 596 S.W.2d 711980 Mo. App. LEXIS 2499

Cited by 11

Opinion — Prewitt

PREWITT, Judge.

Husband appeals from a decree dissolving his marriage of thirty years. He complains of the award to his wife of 55% of the proceeds from the sale of two farms in addition to awarding her other assets. He also claims her award of $100 per month maintenance was error, contending that he is unable to work and that she received sufficient marital property to provide for her needs.

Our examination of the record convinces us that no error of law appears and that the judgment is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. An opinion would have no prece-dential value and we affirm by memorandum opinion in compliance with Rule 84.-16(b), V.A.M.R.

The trial court has discretion in the division of marital property. A just division does not have to be equal. This is particularly true where one party has engaged in misconduct.

Arp v. Arp, 572 S.W.2d 232, 235 (Mo.App.1978). Under §§ 452.330, RSMo 1978, and the evidence, the division was within the court’s discretion.

There was sufficient evidence of the elements set forth in § 452.335, RSMo 1978 for the court to grant the maintenance awarded. The parties’ abilities to work were in dispute. Where there is conflicting testimony, deference is given to the trial court’s conclusions.

In re Marriage of Reagan, 589 S.W.2d 118, 120 (Mo.App.1979). A wife should not have to consume her part of the marital property for living expenses before she would be entitled to maintenance.

In re Marriage of Powers, 527 S.W.2d 949, 955 (Mo.App.1975).

The judgment is affirmed.

All concur, except FLANIGAN, C. J., re-cused.

NORWIN D. HOUSER, Senior Judge, concurs.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 11 cases

View all citing references →

State Appellate Courts11

Relies on it most ⓘ

Edic v. Edic729 S.W.2d 629 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987)
In re the Marriage of Lewis808 S.W.2d 919 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991)
Sinclair v. Sinclair837 S.W.2d 355 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992)
In re Marriage of Gardner890 S.W.2d 303 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994)
Carter v. Carter616 S.W.2d 543 (Mo. Ct. App. 1981)
In re the Marriage of Pehle622 S.W.2d 711 (Mo. Ct. App. 1981)

Most recent

In re the Marriage of Smith892 S.W.2d 767 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995)
In re Marriage of Gardner890 S.W.2d 303 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994)
Sinclair v. Sinclair837 S.W.2d 355 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992)
In re the Marriage of Lewis808 S.W.2d 919 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991)
Edic v. Edic729 S.W.2d 629 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987)
Schnitker v. Schnitker646 S.W.2d 123 (Mo. Ct. App. 1983)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

Depth	Case	Cited by
	In re the Marriage of Powers, 527 S.W.2d 949 (Mo. Ct. App. 1975)	133
	Arp v. Arp, 572 S.W.2d 232 (Mo. Ct. App. 1978)	43
	In re the Marriage of Reagan, 589 S.W.2d 118 (Mo. Ct. App. 1979)	12

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list