Disclaimer: All facts gleaned from the filings stated hereafter are only as truthful as the petitioner. The tone of this article expresses a style of writing historically employed by America’s greatest writers and, as such, is for opinion purposes only. No intentional harm is due. Do not read if the topic of divorce (even your own) causes you emotional distress. Continue at your own risk.
A petition filed in the Family Court Division of St. Charles County sets out the outline of a marriage that, by the petitioner’s account, has reached its end. Bradley K. Schallon is seeking to dissolve his marriage to Kaylie A.-M. Schallon, placing the matter before the circuit court in April 10, 2026, as reflected in the court’s record and accompanying verification.
The filing establishes the framework first. Both parties are described as long-time residents of Missouri, each having lived in St. Charles County for more than four years prior to the petition. Their marriage began on August 1, 2020, in St. Charles, and was formally registered there. The separation, identified as occurring around June 28, 2025, is presented without further detail, a date marking the shift from a shared household to separate lives.
From there, the petition turns to what the court is being asked to decide. It states that the marriage is irretrievably broken, with no reasonable likelihood of preservation. The petitioner requests joint legal and physical custody, noting that no prior arrangements have been finalized. The filing also indicates that no other proceedings involving custody or related matters are known to either party, and that the court should calculate support in accordance with Missouri guidelines.
Financial considerations are addressed in measured terms. The petitioner asks that separate property be set aside accordingly and that marital assets and debts be divided fairly. In addition, the filing includes a request for contribution toward attorney fees and litigation costs, citing limited financial resources. No further claims are introduced beyond these structured requests.
As with many filings of this kind, the document does not attempt to explain the personal history behind the legal claims. It adheres to the requirements of the court, setting in motion a process that will proceed through filings, review, and eventual determination. What begins here is less a narrative than a sequence—one that moves forward through procedure, guided by the court’s timeline and the parties’ responses.
Please contact VowBreakers for access to documents related to the case.
