MCGINNIS v. HUGHES (2021)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Ottis MCGINNIS, Respondent, v. Amy HUGHES, Appellant.

WD 84180

Decided: November 30, 2021

Before Division One: W. Douglas Thomson, Presiding Judge, and Alok Ahuja and Karen King Mitchell, Judges

Ottis McGinnis, Buckner, MO, Respondent, pro se. Shanna Jacoby, Independence, MO, Attorney for Appellant.

Order

Amy Hughes (Mother) appeals the judgment dismissing her motion to modify custody and granting the family access motion filed by Ottis McGinnis (Father). Mother raises seven points on appeal. She claims that the trial court erred because its findings with respect to the first, second, third, fourth, sixth, and seventh custody factors under § 452.375, RSMo Cum. Supp. 2019, are not supported by substantial evidence and are against the weight of the evidence (Points I-VI). For her final point, Mother claims that the court erred because its finding that she refused to communicate with Father is not supported by substantial evidence and is against the weight of the evidence (Point VII). Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

Per Curiam:

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network