Miller v. Miller
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-01542-COA Linked Case(s): 2002-CA-01542-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-25-2004 Opinion Author: Southwick, P.J. Holding: AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Divorce: Adultery - Lump sum alimony Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee, Irving, Myers and Griffis, JJ. Dissenting Author : Bridges, P.J. Dissent Joined By : Thomas and Chandler, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - DOMESTIC RELATIONS |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-11-2002 Appealed from: Hinds County Chancery Court Judge: Denise Owens Disposition: DEBRA MILLER AWARDED A DIVORCE FROM LEE MILLER BASED ON UNCONDONED ADULTERY; LUMP SUM ALIMONY AWARDED Case Number: 2000-2096 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Lee Miller |
JOHN R. REEVES |
||
| Appellee: | Debra Miller | 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: | Divorce: Adultery - Lump sum alimony |
| Summary of the Facts: | Debra Miller filed for divorce from Lee Miller based on uncondoned adultery. The chancellor granted the divorce based on uncondoned adultery. There was division of property, including some unimproved land that was ordered sold and the proceeds divided. Lee was ordered to pay as lump sum alimony the second mortgage payments on the home. Lee appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Lee argues that lump sum alimony was improperly awarded. Factors the court should consider in awarding lump sum alimony include substantial contribution to accumulation of total wealth of the payor either by quitting a job to become a housewife, or by assisting in the spouse's business; a long marriage; where the recipient spouse has no separate income or the separate estate is meager by comparison; and without a lump sum award the receiving spouse would lack any financial security. In this case, the chancellor improperly injected the issue of fault for the divorce. While fault is a consideration in awarding periodic alimony, it has not been identified as a factor in lump sum alimony. Besides relying on fault, the chancellor also erred in giving weight to the fact that Debra had little separate estate absent lump sum alimony. Since Lee has received no property distribution, it was error to require him to equalize the distribution through lump sum alimony. Though lump sum alimony was inappropriate on these facts, Debra had requested alimony in her complaint for divorce. The financial needs of the wife, the fault of the husband, and the somewhat disparate incomes might justify periodic alimony. The case is reversed and remanded for consideration of periodic alimony. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
