Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 487.030 (2026)

Findings by commissioner become judgment of court, when, notice of findings

✓ current as of May 2026

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

487.030. Findings by commissioner become judgment of court, when, notice of findings — motion for hearing by judge, time limit, computation of time. — 1. The findings and recommendations of the commissioner shall become the judgment of the court when adopted and confirmed by an order of a circuit or an associate circuit judge. Notice of the findings and recommendations of the commissioner, together with a statement relative to the right to file a motion for rehearing, shall be given to the parties whose case has been heard by the commissioner, and to any other person that the court may direct. This notice may be given at the hearing, or by mail or other service directed by the court.

2. The parties to a cause of action heard by a commissioner are entitled to file with the court a motion for a hearing by a judge of the family court either within fifteen days after receiving notice of the findings of the commissioner at the hearing, or within fifteen days after the mailing, or within fifteen days after other service directed by the court. In cases in which the family court has jurisdiction pursuant to subdivision (1) of subsection 1 of section 211.031, the juvenile officer, in addition to the parties listed above, is also entitled to file with the court a motion for a hearing by a judge of the family court within fifteen days after receiving notice of the findings of the commissioner. The judge shall promptly rule on such motion and, in his discretion, may either sustain or deny the motion, and if the motion is sustained, the judge shall set a date for a hearing. If the motion for rehearing is not ruled on within forty-five days after the motion is filed, it is denied for all purposes. In computing the forty-five days, no day shall be counted during which the court lacks power to act because of an order of a superior court.

--------

(L. 1993 H.B. 346 § 2 subsecs. 3, 4, A.L. 1995 S.B. 174, A.L. 1996 H.B. 1619, A.L. 1998 S.B. 910)

(1998) A commissioner does not have judicial power to enter a final judgment. Slay v. Slay, 965 S.W.2d 845 (Mo.banc).

(1998) Failure to timely request review of circuit judge waives objection to commissioner's authority, findings and legal conclusions. conclusions. State ex rel. York v. Daugherty, 969 S.W.2d 223 (Mo.banc).

(1999) Default denial of motion for rehearing violates Article V, Section 18 of the Missouri Constitution and is unconstitutional. Fowler v. Fowler, 984 S.W.2d 508 (Mo.banc).

(2003) Procedure for requesting a hearing and provision for denying such motions if not ruled on within statutory time period is unconstitutional; provisions of Rule 130 supersede the statute. Dolan v. Dolan, 107 S.W.3d 438 (Mo.App.E.D.).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 33 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1995–2021 · leading case: State Ex Rel. York v. Daugherty, 969 S.W.2d 223 (Mo. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State Ex Rel. York v. Daugherty, 969 S.W.2d 223 (Mo. 1998). · cites it 13× “030 refer to section 487.030, RSMo Supp.1997, which became effective May 15, 1996.”

Fowler v. Fowler, 984 S.W.2d 508 (Mo. 1999). · cites it 15× “Copies of the “judgment” and order were mailed to the parties on April 18, 1997, along with notice to the parties of their rights to request a hearing with a family court judge pursuant to section 487.030, RSMo. Mrs. Fowler filed timely motions for a rehearing, to amend the…”

Marriage of Slay v. Slay, 965 S.W.2d 845 (Mo. 1998). · cites it 6× “Section 487.030, RSMo Supp.1997 provides, in relevant part: 1.”

State, Dep't of Soc. Servs., Div. of Child Support Enf't v. Houston, 989 S.W.2d 950 (Mo. 1999). · cites it 11× “030 refer to section 487.030, RSMo Supp.1997, which became effective May Í 5, 1996.”

Lawrence v. Lawrence, 938 S.W.2d 333 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 6× “Section 487.030, RSMo 1994 directs the commissioner to make written findings and recommendations, which are transmitted to the judge of the family court.”

State Ex Rel. Hilburn v. Staeden, 91 S.W.3d 607 (Mo. 2002). · cites it 3× “This provision was seen as a legislative attempt to “transmogrify the findings and recommendations of a commissioner into a ‘judgment of the court,’ ” and consequently deemed a nullity.”

Wright v. Wright, 1 S.W.3d 52 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 3× “The parties were notified on January 8, 1997, that the findings, recommendations, and proposed judgment of the commissioner would become the final judgment of the circuit court if the parties did not request a hearing by a judge of the family court within fifteen days.”

Wright Ex Rel. McBath v. Wright, 129 S.W.3d 882 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 3× “” The judgment declared Respondent to be the natural father of Alexous; it awarded joint legal custody of Alexous to the parties and primary physical custody to Appellant.”

Fowler v. Fowler, 21 S.W.3d 1 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 9× “On February 9, 1999, the Supreme Court dismissed wife’s appeal on the grounds that the judgment was not final in that wife’s motion for rehearing under Section 487.030 RSMo (1994) and Rule 127.”

Keck v. Keck, 996 S.W.2d 652 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 6× “On November 7, 1996, Robert filed a Motion for Hearing by Judge pursuant to section 487.030 RSMo Supp.1996. The trial court denied the motion on November 19, 1996 but did not adopt or confirm the commissioner’s findings and recommendations.”

In Re Marriage of Bloom, 926 S.W.2d 512 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 5× “By an act that took effect August 28,1995, the General Assembly repealed § 487.030, RSMo 1994, and replaced it with a new statute, identically numbered.”

State ex rel. Kramer v. Walker, 926 S.W.2d 72 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 10× “Section 487.030 RSMo 1993, provides the foundation of their argument.”

Show all 33 citing cases →

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.