Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 452.355 (2026)

Allocation of cost of action and attorney fees by court

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

452.355. Allocation of cost of action and attorney fees by court — actions for failure to pay child support, reasonable costs and attorney fees to be paid by obligor, when — definitions. — 1. Unless otherwise indicated, the court from time to time after considering all relevant factors including the financial resources of both parties, the merits of the case and the actions of the parties during the pendency of the action, may order a party to pay a reasonable amount for the cost to the other party of maintaining or defending any proceeding pursuant to sections 452.300 to 452.415 and for attorney's fees, including sums for legal services rendered and costs incurred prior to the commencement of the proceeding and after entry of a final judgment. The court may order that the amount be paid directly to the attorney, who may enforce the order in the attorney's name.

2. In any proceeding in which the failure to pay child support pursuant to a temporary order or final judgment is an issue, if the court finds that the obligor has failed, without good cause, to comply with such order or decree to pay the child support, the court shall order the obligor, if requested and for good cause shown, to pay a reasonable amount for the cost of the suit to the obligee, including reasonable sums for legal services. The court may order that the amount be paid directly to the attorney, who may enforce the order in his name.

3. For purposes of this section, an "obligor" is a person owing a duty of support and an "obligee" is a person to whom a duty of support is owed.

4. For purposes of this section, "good cause" includes any substantial reason why the obligor is unable to pay the child support as ordered. Good cause does not exist if the obligor purposely maintains his inability to pay.

--------

(L. 1973 H.B. 315 § 12, A.L. 1988 H.B. 1272, et al., A.L. 1998 S.B. 910)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 370 cases (13 in the last 5 years), 1975–2025 · leading case: Goins v. Goins, 406 S.W.3d 886 (Mo. 2013).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Goins v. Goins, 406 S.W.3d 886 (Mo. 2013). · cites it 24× “Kenneth Goins appeals from a judgment entered pursuant to section 452.355 requiring him to pay $7,500 for appellate attorney fees incurred by Mr.”

Jamie Morgan v. Justin Morgan, 497 S.W.3d 359 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 14× “Mother first argues the award of attorney’s fees was a misapplication of the law or contrary to the law, in that the trial court’s Modification Judgment equivocated as to the legal authority for the award; specifically, Mother contends it is unclear whether the award of…”

Alberswerth v. Alberswerth, 184 S.W.3d 81 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 10× “355 are to § 452.355, RSMo 2000. Section 452.355.1 states in relevant part: Unless otherwise indicated, the court from time to time after considering all relevant factors including the financial resources of both parties, the merits of the case and the actions of the parties…”

Mitalovich v. Toomey, 217 S.W.3d 338 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 18× “First, he contends that the trial court's order was an award of attorneys' fees under Section 452.355 RSMo., which could not be entered without evidence of the parties' financial resources.”

Cohen v. Cohen, 73 S.W.3d 39 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 6× “In Point IV, the appellant claims that the trial court erred in awarding the respondent attorney’s fees of $41,751 because in doing so, the court did not consider, as required by § 452.355, the respondent’s financial resources to pay her own fees and her actions during the…”

Bruns v. Bruns, 186 S.W.3d 449 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 10× “Capraro assumes that the authority for the award of attorney’s fees is section 452.355. Section 452.355.1 allows for the recovery of costs associated with “maintaining or defending any proceeding pursuant to sections 452.”

Erickson v. Blackburn, 169 S.W.3d 69 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 10× “"Section 452.355 RSMo 2000 provides that the trial court may order a party to pay reasonable attorney's fees after considering all relevant factors including the financial resources of both parties, the merits of the case, and the actions of the parties during the pendency of…”

Flach v. Flach, 645 S.W.2d 718 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 10× “Considering the husband’s appeal, he contends that the trial court abused its discretion by exceeding the scope of § 452.355 RSMo (1978), which provides: “The court from time to time after considering all relevant factors including the financial resources of both parties may…”

Fisher v. Evans (In Re Evans), 2 B.R. 85 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 1979). · cites it 11× “In so doing, it expressly declined to determine whether awards of attorney’s fees under section 452.355 RSMo could constitute nondischargeable maintenance or support in bankruptcy proceedings.”

In Re the Marriage of: Jeneffer Keet Bell & Mark Robert Bell, JENEFFER KEET, f/k/a JENEFFER KEET BELL, Petitioner-Respondent v. MARK ROBERT BELL & JIMMIE BELL, 481 S.W.3d 855 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 7× “We note that the Rogers court construed § 452.355 RSMo (1986). Although the language of § 452.”

Hoffmann v. Hoffmann, 676 S.W.2d 817 (Mo. 1984). · cites it 4× “The trial court is vested with broad discretion in awarding attorney fees, *829 § 452.355, RSMo 1978, and abuse of discretion is a prerequisite to an overturn of such awards.”

Ronald Wuebbeling, Petitioner/Respondent v. Jill Wuebbeling n/k/a Jill Clark, 574 S.W.3d 317 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 8× “” Again, although the trial court derived authority to order attorney’s fees from Section 452.355, its basis for doing so was so inextricably bound to the judgment of contempt it is clear the award was to punish Mother for her contempt.”

Show all 370 citing cases →

— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 452.355(1) — 5 cases

Runyan v. Runyan, 907 S.W.2d 267 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995).

Coleman v. Coleman, 318 S.W.3d 715 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Heutel v. Heutel, 803 S.W.2d 84 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990).

Kelly v. Kelly, 340 S.W.3d 673 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Frisella v. Frisella, 872 S.W.2d 637 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994).

— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 452.355(2) — 3 cases

Sutton v. Schwartz, 808 S.W.2d 15 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991).

Sutton v. Schwartz, 860 S.W.2d 833 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993).

Heider v. Heider, 822 S.W.2d 446 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.