Henderson v. State of Missouri, Department of Social Services, Family Support Division
Appeal from Circuit Court of Cole County to Missouri Court of Appeals – Western District
WD83628
Opinion Filed June 1, 2021
Outcome: Reversed and Remanded
Husband and Wife divorced in 2008. Husband was ordered to $200/month in child support. On June 27, 2018, the Family Support Division (FSD) filed a motion for modification of judicial child support order requesting that Father’s support obligation be increased. Father requested an administrative hearing. He alleged: Father was unemployed; the oldest child was 19 years old; and Father was not informed that the oldest child was attending college.
An administrative hearing was held on October 3, 2018. The parties provided almost no testimony regarding the eldest child’s college attendance, or lack thereof. Rather, the testimony at the hearing focused on Mother and Father’s income, employment, expenses, and provision of health insurance for the children.
The only documentary evidence pertaining to the oldest child’s college attendance was a Child Status Questionnaire completed by Mother attesting that the children had always met state law requirements for current support to continue and an admissions letter addressed to the oldest child. The letter was dated May 21, 2018, and had the name and location of the institution redacted. A Child Support Specialist for the FSD submitted a revised Form 14 showing a presumed child support amount of $1197 per month. The Court also did not request any information about the eldest child’s college attendance.
The Court entered the order modifying Father’s child support award from $200/month to $1197/month.
On December 11, 2018, Father filed a petition for judicial review in the Cole County Circuit Court contesting the FSD’s proposed child support modification. On February 13, 2020, the Cole County Circuit Court found that a modification is appropriate under section 454.496.
On Appeal, Father argued that the trial court misinterpreted and misapplied the law because the court did not comply with the requirements of Section 452.340 regarding the continuation of the parental support obligation after the child reaches the age of eighteen years old.
Section 452.340.5 extends the continuation of child support benefits past the age of eighteen. The aforementioned section requires the child to submit college documentation at the start of each semester to remain eligible for support and the non-custodial parent is also permitted to request the child’s grades. The Appellate opinion noted that, “Failure to comply with this provision does not mandate, but may result in termination of a parent’s support obligation.” Furthermore, the Appellate Opinion held that, “Case law also supports that the child is required to provide some form of contemporaneous or prior notification at the beginning of each semester to impose a continued parental support obligation under Section 452.340.5.”
In the present case, no inquiry was made during the administrative hearing as to whether or not the child qualified for child support under section 452.340.5.
Reversed and Remanded. The trial court is to make findings as to whether or not the child qualifies for child support pursuant to Section 452.340.5.
