Skip to main content

Pickering v. Pickering

Citations

  • 314 S.W.3d 822
  • 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 933
  • 2010 WL 2649855

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • stating that an extraordinary expenses award must not duplicate ordinary living expenses already covered by the presumed, basic child support amount
  • “Even in a court-tried case, where no post-trial motion is required to preserve substantive issues for appellate review, Rule 78.07(b), we cannot address arguments that the appellant failed to raise at trial.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Mitchell, Hardwick, Martin

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

20 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

28 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.