Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.350 (2026)

Judgments presumed to be paid, when

✓ current as of May 2026

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

516.350. Judgments presumed to be paid, when — presumption, how rebutted — inclusion in the automated child support system — judgment for unpaid rent, revived by publication. — 1. Every judgment, order or decree of any court of record of the United States, or of this or any other state, territory or country, except for any judgment, order, or decree awarding child support or maintenance or dividing pension, retirement, life insurance, or other employee benefits in connection with a dissolution of marriage, legal separation or annulment which mandates the making of payments over a period of time or payments in the future, shall be presumed to be paid and satisfied after the expiration of ten years from the date of the original rendition thereof, or if the same has been revived upon personal service duly had upon the defendant or defendants therein, then after ten years from and after such revival, or in case a payment has been made on such judgment, order or decree, and duly entered upon the record thereof, after the expiration of ten years from the last payment so made, and after the expiration of ten years from the date of the original rendition or revival upon personal service, or from the date of the last payment, such judgment shall be conclusively presumed to be paid, and no execution, order or process shall issue thereon, nor shall any suit be brought, had or maintained thereon for any purpose whatever. An action to emancipate a child, and any personal service or order rendered thereon, shall not act to revive the support order.

2. In any judgment, order, or decree awarding child support or maintenance, each periodic payment shall be presumed paid and satisfied after the expiration of ten years from the date that periodic payment is due, unless the judgment has been otherwise revived as set out in subsection 1 of this section. This subsection shall take effect as to all such judgments, orders, or decrees which have not been presumed paid pursuant to subsection 1 of this section as of August 31, 1982.

3. In any judgment, order, or decree dividing pension, retirement, life insurance, or other employee benefits in connection with a dissolution of marriage, legal separation or annulment, each periodic payment shall be presumed paid and satisfied after the expiration of ten years from the date that periodic payment is due, unless the judgment has been otherwise revived as set out in subsection 1 of this section. This subsection shall take effect as to all such judgments, orders, or decrees which have not been presumed paid pursuant to subsection 1 of this section as of August 28, 2001.

4. In any judgment, order or decree awarding child support or maintenance, payment duly entered on the record as provided in subsection 1 of this section shall include recording of payments or credits in the automated child support system created pursuant to chapter 454 by the family support division or payment center pursuant to chapter 454.

5. Any judgment, order, or decree awarding unpaid rent may be revived upon publication consistent with the publication requirements of section 506.160 and need not be personally served on the defendant.

--------

(RSMo 1939 § 1038, A.L. 1982 S.B. 468, A.L. 1999 S.B. 291, A.L. 2001 S.B. 10, A.L. 2014 H.B. 1231 merged with H.B. 1299 Revision merged with S.B. 655)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 886; 1919 § 1341; 1909 § 1912

(1982) Periodic child support judgments that have not been adjudicated to have lapsed are not "presumed paid" within the meaning of this section. In re Marriage of Holt (Mo. banc), 635 S.W.2d 335.

(1984) Change in statutory period of limitation excludes from the ten year bar any judgment awarding maintenance payments over a period of time, renewed former wife's maintenance judgment for all sums falling due after the effective date of the statute. Walls v. Walls (Mo.App.), 673 S.W.2d 450.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 97 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1953–2024 · leading case: Hanff v. Hanff, 987 S.W.2d 352 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hanff v. Hanff, 987 S.W.2d 352 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 50× “On Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer In a motion for rehearing and/or transfer, counsel for Betty Ann argues, among other things, that because Shirley failed to plead section 516.350 RSMo 1994 as an affirmative defense, we erred in holding that section 516.”

In Re Boland, 155 S.W.3d 65 (Mo. 2005). · cites it 15× “It claimed that the judgment was not timely revived pursuant *67 to section 516.350, RSMo Cum.Supp.2003, 2 which establishes a rebuttable presumption that judgments are paid, in certain circumstances, after 10 years from them date of entry.”

Beck v. Fleming, 165 S.W.3d 156 (Mo. 2005). · cites it 20× “The circuit court determined that the judgment of dissolution as to those specific payments was presumed paid pursuant to the applicable version of section 516.350. This Court has jurisdiction, Mo.”

Sparks v. Trantham, 814 S.W.2d 621 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 18× “Whether the August 31, 1982, amendment to § 516.350 operates retroactively to the period prior to August 31, 1982.”

Driscoll v. Konze, 322 S.W.2d 824 (Mo. 1959). · cites it 25× “It is defendant’s position on this appeal that the trial court correctly sustained his motion to quash for two reasons: The original $12,000 judgment, entered on January 12, 1927, expired on January 12, 1937, by reason of Section 516.350 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S., and thus the…”

Martin v. Martin, 334 S.W.3d 741 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 20× “On appeal, Father maintains that the decree ordering him to pay periodic child support was not revived pursuant to section 516.350 (RSMo 1982). 1 Father thus maintains that as of July 1998, ten years after his final periodic child support payment was due, he was presumed by…”

In Re Marriage of Holt, 635 S.W.2d 335 (Mo. 1982). · cites it 12× “Respondent filed a motion to quash, alleging that since the child-support judgment had not been revived within ten *336 years of rendition, it was conclusively presumed paid under § 516.350, RSMo 1978. On February 17, 1981, the trial court issued its findings of fact and…”

DeMoranville v. Tetreault, 654 S.W.2d 71 (Mo. 1983). · cites it 11× “Wilfred pointed out that the judgment was entered June 22, 1967, and asserted that, pursuant to § 516.350, RSMo 1978 2 the judgment “must be conclusively presumed to be paid or satisfied.”

Schmidt v. Schmidt, 617 S.W.2d 601 (Mo. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 16× “Respondent’s motion to dismiss appellant’s application for writ of scire facias for revival of judgment was based upon the assertion more than ten years had elapsed between the 1966 divorce decree and the 1980 writ of scire facias and that, therefore, *604 the judgment was…”

Hughes v. Davidson-Hues, 330 S.W.3d 114 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 12× “Section 516.350 bars enforcement of judgments, not contracts.”

Ivie v. Missouri Dep't of Soc. Servs., Div. of Child Support Enf't, 793 S.W.2d 212 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 16× “” [[Image here]] Subsection 1 of Section 516.350, RSMo 1986, dealing generally with “every judgment, order or decree of any court of record of the United States, .”

Ferguson v. Ferguson, 636 S.W.2d 323 (Mo. 1982). · cites it 9× “The issue in these cases of the applicability and effect of § 516.350, RSMo 1978, to periodic payments incident to dissolution has been decided recently in Holt v.”

Show all 97 citing cases →

— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.350(1) — 1 case

Sanner v. Forbes, 651 S.W.2d 139 (Mo. 1983).

— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.350(2) — 1 case

Sanner v. Forbes, 651 S.W.2d 139 (Mo. 1983).

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.