St. Louis Counsel
Ott Law Firm

Case Authority

auman v richard 672 sw3d 277

This authority appears in 11 citation records in the Ott Law Firm Missouri court opinion archive.

Canonical ID
case:auman-v-richard-672-sw3d-277
Citation Sample
Auman v. Richard, 672 S.W.3d 277
Cases Shown
11
Archive note: 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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source. This archive contains Missouri appellate slip opinions reproduced for research convenience, not the final official reporter version. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.

Related Practice Pages

Practical guidance connected to cases citing this authority

These links route legal-research traffic from this authority profile into Ott Law Firm practice pages when the authority itself or the cited cases map to a practical client issue.

Civil LitigationCriminal LawFamily LawReal EstatePersonal InjuryCar Accidents

Legal Help From The Archive

Need help with an issue tied to auman v richard 672 sw3d 277?

This authority profile is public case-law research. If the authority connects to your claim or dispute, Ott Law Firm can help evaluate evidence, deadlines, and next steps.

Free ConsultationCall Ott Law Firm

Citation Treatment

cited

11

Cases Citing auman v richard 672 sw3d 277

Showing up to 50 opinion records linked to this authority.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Feb 24, 2026

In re the Marriage of: Stacey L. Noble vs. Bradford R. Noble

cited

Citation: Auman v. Richard, 672 S.W.3d 277

Wife appealed the trial court's dissolution judgment, challenging the court's failure to provide a remedy after independent investigation of facts, the use of normalized income to determine husband's maintenance obligation, and the finding that husband lacked ability to pay maintenance. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment in all respects.

Family LawCivil Litigation