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 marriage recorded in St. Louis County in April 2017 is now set before the Circuit Court of St. Louis County for dissolution, its details arranged in the measured language of a formal petition. Raven Nicole McFerren brings the action against David LaGrant McFerren II, asking the court to recognize what the filing describes as an irretrievable breakdown.

The document situates both parties in Florissant, each having maintained residence in St. Louis County for the statutory period preceding the case. It recounts a shared timeline: a marriage beginning April 8, 2017, and a physical separation noted as February 13, 2024. No active military service is indicated for either party, and both are described as adults capable of self-support.

Within the petition, questions of custody and support are outlined but not resolved. The filing proposes joint physical custody, alongside a request that sole legal custody be granted to the petitioner. It also seeks a determination of child support consistent with Missouri guidelines, to be applied retroactively to the filing of the petition. The record adds that no prior proceedings concerning custody or related matters have involved the parties, and no external claims to custody are known.

Property and financial obligations appear as parallel considerations. The petition references marital assets and debts to be divided equitably, while distinguishing separate property attributed to the petitioner. It also states that neither party requires maintenance from the other, narrowing the scope of financial dependency as the court reviews the case.

The filing, sworn and subscribed in April 9, 2026, marks a procedural beginning rather than an end. Such petitions move forward in increments—responses, hearings, orders—each step refining what is, at this stage, a structured account of separation. The court’s role will be to translate these assertions into enforceable terms, concluding a process that unfolds as much through time as through law.

Please contact VowBreakers for access to documents related to the case.