{"disclaimer":"This is a summary of public court records and is not legal advice. Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"william-c-woodard","displayName":"WILLIAM C. WOODARD","totalCases":1},"cases":[{"caseId":"moappsd:sd37047:2022-05-05","opinionId":"9628a74e-3538-5e92-bb5c-467b8162399b","slug":"william-c-woodard-respondent-v-steven-w-conde-appellant-d37047","caseName":"WILLIAM C. WOODARD, Respondent\nvs.\nSTEVEN W. CONDE, Appellant","caseNumber":"SD37047","court":"moappsd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District","decisionDate":"2022-05-05","year":2022,"display_summary":"Steven W. Conde appealed the renewal of a full order of child protection, arguing there was no substantial evidence that its expiration would place the child in imminent present danger of abuse. The circuit court had renewed the order for another year. The Southern District of Missouri affirmed, holding that Section 455.516.1 RSMo does not require a finding of imminent present danger for the renewal of a child protection order, distinguishing cases related to adult abuse orders.","primaryTopic":"family-law","topicSlugs":["family-law","appellate-procedure","standard-of-review"],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=186693","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/william-c-woodard-respondent-v-steven-w-conde-appellant-d37047","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"family","label":"Family Law","href":"/practice-areas/family","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: family-law"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/family"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: appellate-procedure"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"respondent"}]}