Section 18.2 Temporary Maintenance

• Library: Family Law Deskbook and 2014 Supp

A. (§18.2) Temporary Maintenance

In a PDL (pendente lite) motion, a party has the right to request that the court issue an order requiring the opposing party to pay a reasonable sum as temporary maintenance. Section 452.315.1, RSMo 2000. The purpose of awarding temporary maintenance is for the court to determine and maintain the status quo that existed before the separation pending the final judgment. Laubinger v. Laubinger, 5 S.W.3d 166 (Mo. App. W.D. 1999). Preservation of the status quo is especially important when the separation occurs at the end of a long marriage. In re Marriage of Deatherage, 595 S.W.2d 36, 40 (Mo. App. S.D. 1980) (citing Brueggemann v. Brueggemann, 551 S.W.2d 853 (Mo. App. E.D. 1977)). The court will look to the parties’ standard of living before the separation, but the standard of living does not automatically establish reasonable needs necessary to maintain the status quo. The court will not order a temporary maintenance amount that is greater than necessary to meet the movant’s current reasonable needs, even if a party has the ability to pay in excess of that amount. Fox v. Fox, 866 S.W.2d 501 (Mo. App. E.D. 1993). A good practice for counsel filing a PDL motion is to include a verified statement of income and expenses from the client; this is often required by local court rules.

When Missouri courts have been confronted with situations in which a party is attending school during the pendency of a dissolution, the concern to maintain the status quo is particularly evident. In these cases, the courts have taken the position that it would be inappropriate to force the movant to give up education and seek employment because the result of such an action would be contrary to the status quo. See, e.g.:

Jensen v. Jensen, 670 S.W.2d 16, 19 (Mo. App. W.D. 1984) (requiring the wife to abandon her education and seek full-time employment would be contrary to this standard)

Tzinberg v. Tzinberg, 631 S.W.2d 681 (Mo. App. E.D. 1982) (whether the wife’s education is necessary or desirable is to be decided at the final dissolution hearing)

Henderson v. Henderson, 822 S.W.2d 474 (Mo. App. E.D. 1991) (there was no abuse of discretion in the court awarding maintenance pendente lite so that the wife could continue her education in art to prepare for employment in that field)

Another situation in which the courts will be particularly concerned about maintaining the status quo is when a party has been a homemaker during the marriage, especially when...