340 S.W.3d 638
Mo. Ct. App.2011Background
- Marriage of Amanda Cochran and Stephen Cochran; two children born of the marriage.
- Husband sustained severe work-related injuries; FELA settlement funds were received during the marriage and placed in trust accounts.
- Circuit Court issued injunction restraining distribution of settlement funds and later allocated $15,000 as marital; remainder treated as non-marital per findings.
- Trial and post-trial proceedings included amended judgments re: property division, visitation, and child support, with the trial court largely adhering to a General Release allocation.
- The trial court altered visitation and ultimately ordered an enforceable summer schedule; child support was recalculated in light of the settlement proceeds.
- Wife appealed alleging improper property classification, improper visitation modification, and miscalculated child support; the Court affirmed after analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Property division of FELA proceeds | Cochran: only $15,000 is marital; rest should be non-marital | Cochran: evidence shows remainder non-marital as per release and evidence | affirmed allocation; substantial/clear evidence supported non-marital portion |
| Summer visitation schedule correction | Wife: original schedule impossible; trial court should not modify without input | Husband: schedule modifications reasonable and enforceable | affirmed; amended schedule within proper post-judgment remedies |
| Child support calculations and reimbursement | Wife: trial court miscalculated imputations and back support | Husband: adjustments justified by settlement and income changes | affirmed to the extent set forth; third point dismissed for noncompliance with Rule 84.04 |
Key Cases Cited
- Heslop v. Heslop, 967 S.W.2d 249 (Mo.App.1998) (analytic approach to marital vs non-marital property; compensations based on loss of wages vs pain and suffering)
- Blydenburg-Dixon v. Dixon, 277 S.W.3d 815 (Mo.App.2009) (distinguishes types of compensation under analytic approach)
- Buckner v. Buckner, 912 S.W.2d 65 (Mo.App.1995) (burden to prove non-marital portion by clear and convincing evidence)
- In re T.S., 925 S.W.2d 486 (Mo.App.1996) (standard of evidence for factual determinations in family matters)
- In re Adoption of W.B.L., 681 S.W.2d 452 (Mo.banc 1984) (valuation/characterization of certain property in adoption context)
- Carter v. Carter, 901 S.W.2d 906 (Mo.App.1995) (post-judgment amendment authority and timeframes)
- Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo.banc 1976) (standard of review for bench trials on dissolution)