## Facts

- Gary and Sharon Geldmeier married in 1963 and had two children (born 1964 and 1968).
- At dissolution, the husband worked as a bottler with significant overtime income; the wife had primarily been a homemaker, recently completed a master’s degree in clinical psychology, and was seeking employment.
- The trial court dissolved the marriage, awarded the wife custody of both children, divided marital assets and debts, ordered child support of $80 per week per child, and awarded the wife $100 per month maintenance.
- The decree included an automatic future change: when one child became emancipated, support for the remaining child would increase to $120 per week.
- The property division awarded the wife most of the tangible assets including the marital home (subject to mortgages) and assigned substantial marital debt to the husband, leaving him with a comparatively small net distribution.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in dividing marital property and allocating marital debts, including assigning the husband debts exceeding the value of assets awarded to him.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by awarding the wife $100 per month maintenance.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in setting child support at $80 per week per child and in ordering an automatic increase to $120 per week for the remaining child upon emancipation of the other.

## Decision

- Affirmed the division of marital property and allocation of marital debts.
- Affirmed the award of $100 per month maintenance.
- Affirmed the then-current child support obligation of $80 per week per child while both children were unemancipated.
- Modified the judgment to delete the provision for an automatic future increase of child support to $120 per week for one child upon emancipation of the other.

## Legal Principles

- Marital property division under Missouri dissolution law is reviewed for abuse of discretion; an award need not be equal to be just if it is fair in light of statutory factors.
- A disproportionate allocation of assets and debts may be upheld where supported by evidence of the parties’ relative earning capacities and the custodial parent’s need to maintain stability for minor children (including maintaining the children in the family home).
- Maintenance awards are reviewed for abuse of discretion and may be sustained where the recipient shows need and the payor has ability to pay, based on statutory considerations.
- Child support determinations are reviewed for abuse of discretion and must be supported by evidence concerning current needs and resources.
- A court may not order speculative, automatic future increases in child support unsupported by the present record; changes in circumstances should be addressed through a later modification proceeding.

## Conclusion

The appellate court held that the trial court acted within its discretion in awarding the custodial parent the home and a larger share of assets while placing more debt on the higher-earning spouse, and in awarding modest maintenance and current child support, but it struck the automatic future child support increase because it lacked an evidentiary basis and depended on unknown future circumstances.


Geldmeier v. Geldmeier, 669 S.W.2d 33 (Mo. Ct. App. 1984)