Blair v. Blair case brief summary
147 S.W.3d 882 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004)
SYNOPSIS: Appellant husband challenged a judgment entered in the Circuit Court of Platte County (Missouri) denying his petition for annulment of his marriage to respondent wife.
FACTS:
-The trial court was not required to accept the husband's own self-serving testimony that he would not have married the wife but for her representations related to the son's paternity.
-The overall gist of the husband's testimony appeared to have been that he would never have seen the wife again after their one-night-stand if it had not been for her calling and telling him that he had a child and that the marriage was, therefore, the result of that representation.
-Such testimony did not establish that the husband relied upon the representations regarding the son's paternity in deciding whether to marry the wife, only that it played a part in his decision to begin a relationship with her.
HOLDING:
Sufficient evidence supported the trial court's determination that the husband would have married the wife regardless of the representation as to the son's paternity.
ANALYSIS:
-The husband admitted that, during their two-year courtship, he fell in love with the wife.
-Prior to the marriage, the couple had a daughter.
-Further, both parties admitted that the husband had questions about the son's paternity prior to the marriage, but that he married her anyway, and that he subsequently adopted both children.
OUTCOME: The judgment was affirmed.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
147 S.W.3d 882 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004)
SYNOPSIS: Appellant husband challenged a judgment entered in the Circuit Court of Platte County (Missouri) denying his petition for annulment of his marriage to respondent wife.
FACTS:
-The trial court was not required to accept the husband's own self-serving testimony that he would not have married the wife but for her representations related to the son's paternity.
-The overall gist of the husband's testimony appeared to have been that he would never have seen the wife again after their one-night-stand if it had not been for her calling and telling him that he had a child and that the marriage was, therefore, the result of that representation.
-Such testimony did not establish that the husband relied upon the representations regarding the son's paternity in deciding whether to marry the wife, only that it played a part in his decision to begin a relationship with her.
HOLDING:
Sufficient evidence supported the trial court's determination that the husband would have married the wife regardless of the representation as to the son's paternity.
ANALYSIS:
-The husband admitted that, during their two-year courtship, he fell in love with the wife.
-Prior to the marriage, the couple had a daughter.
-Further, both parties admitted that the husband had questions about the son's paternity prior to the marriage, but that he married her anyway, and that he subsequently adopted both children.
OUTCOME: The judgment was affirmed.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment