Goins v. Goins
2013 Mo. LEXIS 38
Mo.2013Background
- Kenneth Goins and Lori Goins divorced in 2003; Goins was ordered to pay child support and maintenance.
- Goins filed post-judgment motions (2005, 2006) to reduce child support; appellate courts reduced child support but left maintenance intact.
- While a second appeal was pending, Lori moved under §452.355 for appellate attorney fees, alleging Goins (an attorney) represented himself, had greater resources, and made her incur extra fees by filing a poorly framed brief.
- The circuit court held a hearing and ordered Goins to pay $7,500 toward Lori’s appellate fees; Goins appealed.
- Issues on appeal included: whether §452.355 permits the trial court to award appellate fees while an appeal is pending (jurisdictional), whether the statute is unconstitutionally vague, whether the fee award was an abuse of discretion, and whether the child support judgment was void.
- The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed: it rejected the jurisdictional and vagueness challenges, found no abuse of discretion, and held the child support judgment was not void.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §452.355 authorizes the trial court to award appellate attorney fees while an appeal is pending | Goins: statute unlawfully lets trial court exercise appellate jurisdiction while appeal pending | State/Respondent: fee awards under §452.355 are collateral matters within trial court’s original jurisdiction | Court: trial court has original jurisdiction to award appellate fees; not an exercise of appellate jurisdiction; argument rejected |
| Whether §452.355 is unconstitutionally vague | Goins: statute fails to define standards, enabling arbitrary awards | Respondent: statute lists factors (financial resources, merits, conduct) and provides adequate guidance | Court: statute gives persons of ordinary intelligence sufficient guidance; not vague |
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion in awarding $7,500 | Goins: award against weight of evidence; he lacks ability to pay; his income lower and more children to support | Respondent: Goins is an attorney who represented himself and has greater resources; trial court is expert on reasonableness of fees | Court: trial court’s discretionary award supported by record (Goins’ self-representation and greater resources); no abuse of discretion |
| Whether the child support judgment is void | Goins: judgment was not based on actual income, he lacked a hearing on modification, affidavits void — so judgment is void | Respondent: errors in evidence/procedure are appeals errors, not jurisdictional defects | Court: judgment is not void; sufficiency-of-evidence claims do not render judgment void; prior appeals resolved these challenges |
Key Cases Cited
- Potts v. Potts, 303 S.W.3d 177 (Mo.App. 2010) (trial court may award attorneys’ fees on appeal under §452.355)
- Spicer v. Donald N. Spicer Revocable Living Trust, 336 S.W.3d 466 (Mo. banc 2011) (trial court jurisdiction divested after Rule 75.01 period absent authorized motion)
- Clarke v. Clarke, 983 S.W.2d 192 (Mo.App. 1998) (circuit court has jurisdiction to consider and grant §452.355 fee awards)
- Schubert v. Schubert, 366 S.W.3d 55 (Mo.App. 2012) (trial court has broad discretion on attorney-fee awards; court is expert on reasonableness)
- Forsyth Fin. Grp., LLC v. Hayes, 351 S.W.3d 738 (Mo.App. 2011) (void-judgment doctrine is narrowly confined)
- Berry v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., 397 S.W.3d 425 (Mo. banc 2013) (appellate courts often remand fee issues to trial courts as trial courts better hear evidence)
- Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609 (1984) (void-for-vagueness doctrine principles)