Finding that marriage is irretrievably broken, when--notice--denialby a party, effect of--alternate findings.
452.320. 1. If both of the parties by petition or otherwisehave stated under oath or affirmation that the marriage isirretrievably broken, or one of the parties has so stated and theother has not denied it, the court, after considering theaforesaid petition or statement, and after a hearing thereonshall make a finding whether or not the marriage is irretrievablybroken and shall enter an order of dissolution or dismissalaccordingly.
2. If one of the parties has denied under oath oraffirmation that the marriage is irretrievably broken, the courtshall consider all relevant factors, including the circumstancesthat gave rise to the filing of the petition and the prospect ofreconciliation, and after hearing the evidence shall
(1) Make a finding whether or not the marriage isirretrievably broken, and in order for the court to find that themarriage is irretrievably broken, the petitioner shall satisfythe court of one or more of the following facts:
(a) That the respondent has committed adultery and thepetitioner finds it intolerable to live with the respondent;
(b) That the respondent has behaved in such a way that thepetitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with therespondent;
(c) That the respondent has abandoned the petitioner for acontinuous period of at least six months preceding thepresentation of the petition;
(d) That the parties to the marriage have lived separate andapart by mutual consent for a continuous period of twelve monthsimmediately preceding the filing of the petition;
(e) That the parties to the marriage have lived separate andapart for a continuous period of at least twenty-four monthspreceding the filing of the petition; or
(2) Continue the matter for further hearing not less thanthirty days or more than six months later, or as soon thereafteras the matter may be reached on the court's calendar, and maysuggest to the parties that they seek counseling. No court shallrequire counseling as a condition precedent to a decree, norshall any employee of any court, or of the state or any politicalsubdivision of the state, be utilized as a marriage counselor.At the adjourned hearing, the court shall make a finding whetherthe marriage is irretrievably broken as set forth in subdivision(1) above and shall enter an order of dissolution or dismissalaccordingly.
(L. 1973 H.B. 315 § 5, A.L. 1977 H.B. 470)
(1976) This act is not a true "no fault" dissolution law and dissolution should not be granted over the objection of an innocent spouse. In re Marriage of Mitchell (A.), 545 S.W.2d 313.
(1977) If a party denies under oath that a marriage is irretrievably broken the court must find one of the statutory grounds has been met. Failure to prove any of these grounds must result in a refusal to dissolve the marriage. In re Marriage of Capstick (A.), 547 S.W.2d 522.
(1977) Held, parties had been living "separate and apart" even though they lived in the same home. In re Marriage of Uhls (A.), 549 S.W.2d 107.
(1977) Failure to mail notice does not deprive the court of jurisdiction. LeBeau v. LeBeau (A.), 556 S.W.2d 204.
(1977) Court erroneously applied the law by failing to hold a hearing on whether marriage is irretrievably broken, when absent party, after receiving notice of interlocutory finding, files an objection within ten days. Brown v. Brown (A.), 561 S.W.2d 374.
(1978) Court must make specific finding that marriage was irretrievably broken before granting a decree of dissolution, B.W. v. F.E.W. (A.), 562 S.W.2d 137.
Finding that marriage is irretrievably broken, when--notice--denialby a party, effect of--alternate findings.
452.320. 1. If both of the parties by petition or otherwisehave stated under oath or affirmation that the marriage isirretrievably broken, or one of the parties has so stated and theother has not denied it, the court, after considering theaforesaid petition or statement, and after a hearing thereonshall make a finding whether or not the marriage is irretrievablybroken and shall enter an order of dissolution or dismissalaccordingly.
2. If one of the parties has denied under oath oraffirmation that the marriage is irretrievably broken, the courtshall consider all relevant factors, including the circumstancesthat gave rise to the filing of the petition and the prospect ofreconciliation, and after hearing the evidence shall
(1) Make a finding whether or not the marriage isirretrievably broken, and in order for the court to find that themarriage is irretrievably broken, the petitioner shall satisfythe court of one or more of the following facts:
(a) That the respondent has committed adultery and thepetitioner finds it intolerable to live with the respondent;
(b) That the respondent has behaved in such a way that thepetitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with therespondent;
(c) That the respondent has abandoned the petitioner for acontinuous period of at least six months preceding thepresentation of the petition;
(d) That the parties to the marriage have lived separate andapart by mutual consent for a continuous period of twelve monthsimmediately preceding the filing of the petition;
(e) That the parties to the marriage have lived separate andapart for a continuous period of at least twenty-four monthspreceding the filing of the petition; or
(2) Continue the matter for further hearing not less thanthirty days or more than six months later, or as soon thereafteras the matter may be reached on the court's calendar, and maysuggest to the parties that they seek counseling. No court shallrequire counseling as a condition precedent to a decree, norshall any employee of any court, or of the state or any politicalsubdivision of the state, be utilized as a marriage counselor.At the adjourned hearing, the court shall make a finding whetherthe marriage is irretrievably broken as set forth in subdivision(1) above and shall enter an order of dissolution or dismissalaccordingly.
(L. 1973 H.B. 315 § 5, A.L. 1977 H.B. 470)
(1976) This act is not a true "no fault" dissolution law and dissolution should not be granted over the objection of an innocent spouse. In re Marriage of Mitchell (A.), 545 S.W.2d 313.
(1977) If a party denies under oath that a marriage is irretrievably broken the court must find one of the statutory grounds has been met. Failure to prove any of these grounds must result in a refusal to dissolve the marriage. In re Marriage of Capstick (A.), 547 S.W.2d 522.
(1977) Held, parties had been living "separate and apart" even though they lived in the same home. In re Marriage of Uhls (A.), 549 S.W.2d 107.
(1977) Failure to mail notice does not deprive the court of jurisdiction. LeBeau v. LeBeau (A.), 556 S.W.2d 204.
(1977) Court erroneously applied the law by failing to hold a hearing on whether marriage is irretrievably broken, when absent party, after receiving notice of interlocutory finding, files an objection within ten days. Brown v. Brown (A.), 561 S.W.2d 374.
(1978) Court must make specific finding that marriage was irretrievably broken before granting a decree of dissolution, B.W. v. F.E.W. (A.), 562 S.W.2d 137.
Finding that marriage is irretrievably broken, when--notice--denialby a party, effect of--alternate findings.
452.320. 1. If both of the parties by petition or otherwisehave stated under oath or affirmation that the marriage isirretrievably broken, or one of the parties has so stated and theother has not denied it, the court, after considering theaforesaid petition or statement, and after a hearing thereonshall make a finding whether or not the marriage is irretrievablybroken and shall enter an order of dissolution or dismissalaccordingly.
2. If one of the parties has denied under oath oraffirmation that the marriage is irretrievably broken, the courtshall consider all relevant factors, including the circumstancesthat gave rise to the filing of the petition and the prospect ofreconciliation, and after hearing the evidence shall
(1) Make a finding whether or not the marriage isirretrievably broken, and in order for the court to find that themarriage is irretrievably broken, the petitioner shall satisfythe court of one or more of the following facts:
(a) That the respondent has committed adultery and thepetitioner finds it intolerable to live with the respondent;
(b) That the respondent has behaved in such a way that thepetitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with therespondent;
(c) That the respondent has abandoned the petitioner for acontinuous period of at least six months preceding thepresentation of the petition;
(d) That the parties to the marriage have lived separate andapart by mutual consent for a continuous period of twelve monthsimmediately preceding the filing of the petition;
(e) That the parties to the marriage have lived separate andapart for a continuous period of at least twenty-four monthspreceding the filing of the petition; or
(2) Continue the matter for further hearing not less thanthirty days or more than six months later, or as soon thereafteras the matter may be reached on the court's calendar, and maysuggest to the parties that they seek counseling. No court shallrequire counseling as a condition precedent to a decree, norshall any employee of any court, or of the state or any politicalsubdivision of the state, be utilized as a marriage counselor.At the adjourned hearing, the court shall make a finding whetherthe marriage is irretrievably broken as set forth in subdivision(1) above and shall enter an order of dissolution or dismissalaccordingly.
(L. 1973 H.B. 315 § 5, A.L. 1977 H.B. 470)
(1976) This act is not a true "no fault" dissolution law and dissolution should not be granted over the objection of an innocent spouse. In re Marriage of Mitchell (A.), 545 S.W.2d 313.
(1977) If a party denies under oath that a marriage is irretrievably broken the court must find one of the statutory grounds has been met. Failure to prove any of these grounds must result in a refusal to dissolve the marriage. In re Marriage of Capstick (A.), 547 S.W.2d 522.
(1977) Held, parties had been living "separate and apart" even though they lived in the same home. In re Marriage of Uhls (A.), 549 S.W.2d 107.
(1977) Failure to mail notice does not deprive the court of jurisdiction. LeBeau v. LeBeau (A.), 556 S.W.2d 204.
(1977) Court erroneously applied the law by failing to hold a hearing on whether marriage is irretrievably broken, when absent party, after receiving notice of interlocutory finding, files an objection within ten days. Brown v. Brown (A.), 561 S.W.2d 374.
(1978) Court must make specific finding that marriage was irretrievably broken before granting a decree of dissolution, B.W. v. F.E.W. (A.), 562 S.W.2d 137.
