Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Marriage of Speir

Court of Appeals of Missouri, Southern District, Second Division

February 6, 2018

In re the Marriage of Mackenzie Everett Speir and Jessica Lynn Speir
v.
JESSICA LYNN SPEIR, Respondent-Respondent. MACKENZIE EVERETT SPEIR, Petitioner-Appellant,

         APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ST. CLAIR COUNTY Honorable Jerry J. Rellihan, Associate Circuit Judge

          Nancy Steffen Rahmeyer, P.J.

         Mackenzie Everett Speir ("Appellant") and Jessica Lynn Speir ("Respondent") were divorced by entry of a dissolution judgment in September 2013, with the Honorable Michael Dawson presiding. The dissolution docket notes that Judge Dawson was "No Longer in Office/Position" as of December 31, 2014, and the "Judge Jerry Rellihan [was] assigned to the case." Nothing was pending at that time. On September 28, 2016, three years after the dissolution was entered, Respondent filed a motion to modify the dissolution judgment. Appellant was served on October 5, 2016, with the modification summons.

         Respondent also filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus on October 14, 2016, in the same case.[1]The hearing date was set for October 24, 2016, on the Writ of Habeas Corpus. Appellant was served on October 18, 2016, with the writ. Appellant's attorney appeared for the habeas corpus hearing on October 24th and the docket reflects it was reset for the following day. On that same day, and just nineteen days after service on Appellant, Appellant filed a motion pursuant to Rule 51.05[2] for a change of judge. The motion was denied as "untimely." The transcript regarding the application for change of judge is set forth below:

THE COURT: [Appellant's attorney], you -- yesterday afternoon at around 4:00, or whatever, 3:00, you filed a motion for change of judge pursuant to 51.05; is that correct?
[Appellant's attorney]: That's correct.
THE COURT: Let me hear your argument as to why you think it's timely.
[Appellant's attorney]: Well, Judge, I reviewed the rule, and to the best of my ability to determine, it's timely filed, and the rule provides upon the filing of a timely filed motion that this Court has no alternative but to sustain the motion.
THE COURT: And you filed this after we had an appearance and a hearing yesterday morning, correct?
[Appellant's attorney]: Well, I --
THE COURT: Correct?
[Appellant's attorney]: Yes.
THE COURT: Okay. So we had an appearance -- You had an appearance yesterday morning before me, the ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.