Brown v. White
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-01639-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-22-2004 Opinion Author: Irving, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Child custody - Material change in circumstances Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Bridges and Southwick, P.JJ., Thomas, Lee, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CUSTODY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 08-29-2002 Appealed from: Hinds County Chancery Court Judge: Denise Owens Disposition: CUSTODY MODIFIED TO CHANGE CUSTODY OF MINOR CHILD FROM STEPHANIE WHITE BROWN TO JAMES FREDERICK WHITE Case Number: G97-2104 0/3 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Stephanie White Brown |
WALTER E. WOOD |
||
| Appellee: | James Frederick White | SHARON PATTERSON THIBODEAUX |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Child custody - Material change in circumstances |
| Summary of the Facts: | When James White and Stephanie White Brown were divorced, the court awarded Brown both legal and physical custody of the couple’s minor daughter. Later, White filed a complaint to modify former judgment and a motion for emergency temporary custody. The court granted White emergency temporary physical custody. After a hearing, the chancellor entered a judgment of modification awarding physical custody of the child to White. Brown appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Brown argues that the court erred in finding a material change in circumstances that adversely affected the child’s welfare and in applying the Albright factors. A modification of custody is warranted if the moving parent successfully shows a material change in circumstances which has an adverse effect on the child, and modification of custody would be in the child’s best interest. Here, the chancellor determined that there had been a material change in circumstances that adversely affected the child’s well-being based on the following findings: the child had moved at least ten times in the four years since her parents had separated; she had failed first grade and was doing poorly academically; the child was exposed to pornographic tapes while in the custody of her mother; Brown’s new job schedule caused problems with the child’s care; and Brown’s relationships with different men was not healthy for the child. Therefore, White met the requisite burden of proof in proving that a material change in circumstance had occurred. The chancellor then found that factors such as the child’s age, each parent’s parenting skills, the parties’ physical and mental health, and each parent’s age and financial stability were all neutral and did not weigh in favor of either Brown or White; that the child’s sex, and her continuity of care up until she was sent to live with her maternal grandmother to attend school weighed in favor of Brown; and that the parents’ employment, the child’s school and community record, and stability of the home environment weighed in favor of White. Given the evidence, the chancellor did not commit manifest error in awarding primary custody of the child to her father. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
