Major Cases and Decisions

Our office works hard to represent all of our clients. Below are some of the results that we have obtained:

(due to attorney client privilege we are unable to provide identifying information about the case)

The below cases are but a few of the thousands of cases that our office has handled over the years but are good examples of the hard work that our office will put for you and your case. These cases serve to demonstrate why many of our clients come back to us time and again for additional work such as estate planning, modifications, and the like.

______________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

Southern District Court of Appeal:  Client was party to a divorce with children that spanned five years and multiple Judges and a separate court case involving the purchase of real estate. Throughout the five years, opposing parent and the children’s attorney made numerous allegations against Client which would result in client’s visitation being reduced to supervised at times. Opposing parent deliberately lied to the trial court about Client’s actions and deliberately mislead the trial court about opposing parent’s actions in the case.  At the same time, opposing parent’s family members obtained a judgment involving the real estate which ordered client and opposing party to each pay back one-half of the loan made by the family members. Numerous attempts were made by family members to garnish Client’s bank accounts for the full amount of the past due loan. No action was taken against opposing parent.  In its decision, the trial court awarded client joint custody with opposing parent and awarded liberal visitation with client and the children. Attorney fees and the loan were ordered to be paid by opposing party as sanctions for opposing party’s actions in the case. Opposing party then tried to reopen the case by improperly using another court case against Client. Those efforts were denied by the trial court and opposing party appealed the decision. Our office was able to successfully defend the decision of the trial court and the judgment was affirmed.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Southern District Court of Appeals:  Client obtained divorce and was awarded custody of child from opposing parent who was in prison for molestation charges.  Opposing parent hired counsel to defend the divorce and to force client to bring child to prison on a regular basis to see opposing parent. Opposing parent’s attorney failed to file the proper paperwork to assure opposing parent’s presence at trial and failed to object to client’s testimony and evidence at trial. Opposing parent then filed an appeal arguing that the trial court violated due process by not making sure the opposing parent was at trial.  Opposing parent also argued that the child should have been ordered to be taken to the prison on a regular basis. Our office was able to successfully defend the decision of the trial court and the judgment was affirmed.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Webster/Greene County:  Client had child with opposing parent.  When child was several months old, opposing parent moved out of state and left the child with client. Months later, opposing parent returned to Missouri and while client was working removed the child from Missouri without client’s knowledge. Opposing parent then attempted to file for a child order of protection against client in the other state. At the same time, our office was able to file a custody case in Greene County. Opposing parent failed to show for court in Missouri despite being personally served and client was able to obtain an award of custody which was needed in order to get law enforcement involved.  Our office then began working with numerous law enforcement agencies, sometimes until 11:00 p.m. at night, in an effort to find client’s child.  Client was contacted by friend of opposing parent who advised client of opposing parent’s plan to flee with the child several states away. In a joint effort, client, our office, law enforcement agencies and the friend were able to convince opposing parent to meet with the friend presumably to begin the journey to the other state.  Instead of friend being at the meeting location, law enforcement was there and able to gain custody of the child. Client then traveled to the other state and regained custody of child that client had not seen in about 4 months. Client was then able to come back to Missouri and filed for an order of protection against opposing parent.  Missouri does not permit a child order of protection to be granted when a previous order of custody is in place except that a child order of protection can be granted so long as the frequency and duration of visitation is not changed. Our office was able to successfully use caselaw and Missouri statutes to obtain the order of protection in Webster County Missouri thereby preventing opposing parent from again removing the child from client’s custody.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Greene County:  Client filed for, and was granted name changes for both parent and child. Grandparent attempted to file a motion to set aside the name change of the child several months later arguing that the grandparent had a right to have the family name passed down and that such right was superior to a parent’s right to decide what name was appropriate for his or her child.  We argued that the grandparent had no standing to file such a motion and that to grant the motion would lead to absurd results of grandparents being able to override decisions of parents.  Court found that the grandparent had no standing. Name changes were made final.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Southern District Court of Appeals:  Clients were granted adoption of child.  Third parties (Appellants) attempted to intervene into the adoption and overturn it in an effort to gain custody of the child. Appellants argued to the Southern District that the Trial Court erred in not allowing them to intervene into the case arguing that they were permitted to intervene as a matter of right and through permissive intervention.  Appellants were unable to demonstrate that they fell into any categories of individuals for intervention as a matter of right or through permissive intervention.  Further, Appellants failed to make sure that the hearing on their motion in the Trial Court was on the record. As such, the Appellants failed to preserve anything for judicial review.  Southern District affirmed the judgment and the adoption was made final.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Webster County: Client obtained divorce in another state and was awarded custody of child in that case.  Client remained in that other state and years later, opposing parent filed for a modification of the out-of-state judgment here in Missouri which required the opposing parent to file what is called a “Registration of Foreign Judgment”.  Even though opposing party was aware of Client’s whereabouts in the other state, opposing party deliberately lied to the trial court about Client’s whereabouts and convinced the trial court to served Client by publication in a local newspaper. Opposing party was then able to obtain a modification of the Judgment and obtained a judgment against Client which included child support, attorney fees and other expenses being levied against Client.  Five years later, Client, who had not moved during this time, was personally served with a motion for contempt that asked for jail time for client’s failure to pay over $20,000.00 (child support, court costs, travel expenses and attorney fees) ordered by the court five years prior. After extensive research, our office discovered that the both the modification case and the registration of foreign judgment had been handled improperly such that the judgment was not properly registered in the state of Missouri. Our office was able to get both the judgment of modification ordering client to pay child support and the registration case dismissed. Client did not have to pay any fees or serve a single day in jail for a judgment that was never made known to Client.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Greene County: Client moved out of state based upon agreement with the other parent. Client followed all of the requirements of the statutory relocation notice and the statutory time frame passed without a response from the opposing party. Relying upon the statements of the opposing parent, client submitted a resignation to client’s employer, rented an apartment in the other state, un-enrolled the children from school here in Missouri, terminated the lease on the apartment here in Missouri and moved with the children to the other state.  As soon as client moved, the opposing party, in bad faith, filed an objection to the relocation in an effort force the trial court to award custody of the children to the opposing parent. Based upon our requests, trial court agreed to allow the children to remain with our client until the case was finished based upon the reputation of our office that we would return the children if so ordered. After participating in a contested evidentiary hearing, our client was granted permission to permanently move out of state with the children.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Webster County: Client permitted the child to visit with the opposing parent who lived out of state and who had chosen to not see the child for several years. The opposing parent then refused to return the child to our client and refused to disclose the child’s whereabouts. Our office arranged for federal authorities to search for the child.  The opposing parent’s actions in hiding the child was supported by counsel who assisted the parent in secreting the child to a hidden location. Our office was able to obtain return of the child and was able to win sole legal and sole physical custody of the child for our client.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Southern District Court of Appeals: Grandparent filed for visitation of grandchild and trial court awarded visitation both in violation of the statute and in excess of what would be a usual schedule of visitation. Our office appealed the case to the appellate court and obtained a reversal of the court’s decision.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Southern District Court of Appeals: Parent’s rights were terminated and the trial court did not grant parent the time as required under the law to appeal the decision before the trial court granted a subsequent petition for adoption. Such a denial was a violation of the parent’s due process rights. Our office appealed the decision and obtained a reversal of the trial court’s decision thereby restoring the parent’s rights.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Southern District Court of Appeals: Parent’s rights were terminated by the trial court. After entering the case our office discovered that the parent had never been properly served with summons and petition. The failure to properly serve the parent violated the parent’s due process rights. Our office appealed the decision and obtained a reversal of the trial court’s decision thereby restoring the parent’s rights. Based upon this decision the court changed their procedures for future cases.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Missouri Supreme Court:  Our office appealed a juvenile court’s decision regarding the application of a criminal case to a juvenile case.  After successfully arguing the case before the Missouri Supreme Court, our office received a unanimous decision in our favor.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Webster County:  Our office represented a parent in a modification. The opposing parent was knowingly permitting the child to be molested on a regular basis by a paramour. After working with the child’s counselor and guardian ad litem our office was able to obtain sole legal and sole physical custody of the child for our client and supervised visitation for the opposing parent.  After being awarded only supervised visitation, opposing parent abandoned the minor child and in the following year, the our client’s spouse was able to successfully adopt the child thereby assuring that the child would never subjected to abuse again.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Southern District Court of Appeals:  Our office represented a client where the opposing party was trying to relocate the residence of the child to another state away from our client. The trial court denied the relocation and the opposing party appealed the decision to the appellate court. Our office was able to successfully defend the trial court’s judgment and the judgment was affirmed.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Polk County:  Parent who lived out of state was being denied visitation by the other parent.  Efforts to obtain custody of the minor children were thwarted when the parent tried to withdraw the children from school.  During the course of the case, the opposing parent was actively trying to alienate the children from our client and our client’s family. At the end of a highly contested multi-day evidentiary hearing our office was able to obtain custody of the children for our client.  Efforts to obtain custody were again thwarted by the other parent who then filed an appeal to the Southern District and a subsequent modification.  Our office was able to force the other parent to turn the children over to our child and, after handling the appeal and subsequent modification our client was permitted to retain custody of the children.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Webster County:  Our office represented a client in a breach of contract case for the sale of real estate. The opposing party, who sued our client for a significant amount of money, repeatedly tried to withhold documents and information in the case. After filing motions with the court pointing out the actions of the opposing party the case against our client was dismissed.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Webster County:  Our office became involved in a case on behalf of a third party where one parent filed a divorce because the other parent was abusing the children.  During the course of the case, it was discovered that the parent with custody was secretly shuttling the children to the other parent for the sole purpose of allowing the children to be sexually abused by the parent. It was also discovered that the children were also being sexually abused by their older siblings. Our office was able to obtain the termination of parental rights of the parents enabling the children to be freed for adoption and freed from sexual abuse.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Webster County:  Client was parent who lost custody of their child when the court awarded custody to the opposing parent based upon that parent’s deception. Opposing party lied to the court about the whereabouts of our client and alleged abuse/neglect by our client as to the child.  Based upon the court’s deception, opposing party was awarded sole legal and sole physical custody of the child with limited visitation to our client and an outrageous amount of child support.  Our office was able to get the judgment overturned and the case reopened. After bringing the opposing party’s deceptions to the attention of the Court our office was able to win joint legal and joint physical custody with liberal visitation and a realistic amount of child support.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Greene County:  Client was parent facing termination of parental rights due to the actions of the family member who had placement of the child and the child’s caseworker. Family member and caseworker were meeting for coffee, sharing clothes and engaging in other inappropriate behaviors.  During family support team meetings, Juvenile Officer attempted to prevent client and her attorney from arguing about the Family Member and threatened to immediately file for termination if client continued to protest the child being placed with Family Member. Based upon the zealous advocacy of our office, we were able to get the child placed into another home that supported the parent-child relationship and the parent and the child reunified.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Southern District Court of Appeals:  Client was divorced by the trial court which denied the other party’s request for our client to pay maintenance (alimony). The other party appealed the decision to the appellate court. Our office was able to successfully defend the court’s decision and the trial court’s judgment was affirmed.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Greene County:  Client was a young parent facing termination of parental rights due to the actions of the placement provider and the worker. The worker later resigned, and the worker’s supervisor took over the case. Our office was able to obtain confirmation from the supervisor that the worker had promised to take whatever steps necessary to assure that the placement provider would be able to adopt the child.  After pointing out how the worker’s actions sabotaged our client’s case our office was able to get the parent and the child reunified.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Wright County:  Client was prospective adoptive parent licensed in one county and trying to adopt child A out of another county. Clients had placement of another child whose parents were making false accusations against our client. The county that placed child A with our client was fully supportive of our client and was aware that the accusations were false. Child A’s parents were also supportive of our clients adopting their child. Unfortunately, the licensing county believed Child B’s accusations and tried to involuntarily terminate our clients’ license which would prevent the adoption of child A and would prevent clients from being licensed in other counties. Our office was able to negotiate a voluntary surrender of the license which enabled our client to successfully adopt the child A in a hearing where child A’s parents were present and supportive of clients.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Christian County:  Our office represented grandparents in a guardianship who had been raising their grandchildren. Mother was a drug user and Father had abandoned the children financially and emotionally. Mother obtained counsel and convinced another set of relatives to enter the case and fight for custody with the end goal of having the relatives return the children to Mother. After a highly contested trial the trial court granted guardianship to our client.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Webster County:  Parent lived out of state with child. Opposing parent filed for custody of the child and deliberately lied to the court as to client’s whereabouts.  After running publication, the other parent obtained a default judgment of full custody and traveled to client’s state and arranged arranged to meet with client and the child.  When client arrived at the meeting place, the child was forcibly removed from our client by opposing parent and other family members and the opposing parent drove straight back to Missouri and hid the child.  Opposing parent brought child to a home with drugs and drinking and repeatedly tried to damage our client’s relationship with the child. Client was forced to remain in state in order to resume custody of the child.  At the conclusion of the case our client was awarded custody of the child and able to return home.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Webster County: Client filed paternity/custody action.  Opposing party was properly served and failed to answer.  Client was awarded custody in a default judgment.  Opposing parent exercised visitation and then refused to return the child.  Opposing parent retained counsel and and filed a motion to set aside and continued to hide the child with the assistance of counsel.  After appearing in court on several occasions, Client was able to regain physical custody of the minor child and was ultimately awarded custody.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Webster County: Client established not-for-profit organization and opposing party was officer of the organization.  Client attempted to “wind down” the organization.  Opposing party sued client stating that client had misappropriated assets of the organization and claimed ownership in a piece of real property that client had purchased for the organization.  Our office was able to successfully defend the client and the opposing party’s petition was denied.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Polk County: Client was sued for alleged failure to pay child support and advised the Court that our client was behind by approximately $20,000.00.  Client had made all of the payments and had actually paid more payments than was required. Client was able to successfully demonstrate to the court that payments had been made and that opposing parent was trying to double dip.  Opposing party’s case was dismissed.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Greene County: Parent’s rights were terminated by the trial court. After carefully reviewing the case our office was able to get the decision reversed due to the trial court’s failure to follow the statutes which resulted in a violation of the parent’s due process rights. The Appellate Court sent the case back to the trial court for a retrial.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Taney County: Parent’s rights were terminated by the trial court. The parent was entitled to the appointment of an attorney but the trial court refused to appoint and attorney in violation of the parent’s due process rights. The Appellate court reversed the decision and sent the case back to the trial court for a retrial.

______________________________________________________________________________________