Marsh v. Marsh


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2003-CA-00355-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 03-16-2004
Opinion Author: Thomas, J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Divorce: Irreconcilable differences - Equitable distribution - Alimony
Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ.
Procedural History: Bench Trial
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - DOMESTIC RELATIONS

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 11-15-2002
Appealed from: Oktibbeha County Chancery Court
Judge: James S. Gore
Disposition: DIVORCE GRANTED ON IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES, PROPERTY DIVIDED.
Case Number: 01-0453

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Gloria Marsh




WILLIAM L. BAMBACH



 

Appellee: Davis Gene Marsh MARK G. WILLIAMSON  

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: Irreconcilable differences - Equitable distribution - Alimony

Summary of the Facts: Gloria Marsh filed for divorce from Davis Gene Marsh, claiming habitual cruel and inhuman treatment and desertion as grounds. Gene filed a counter-complaint alleging habitual cruel and inhuman treatment. An agreed order was entered in chancery court which froze the assets of the parties until a hearing on the divorce was had. Before the hearing, Gene sought a preliminary injunction to halt Gloria's sale of marital property in violation of the agreed order and also filed a petition for contempt against Gloria for her failures to comply with the various court orders. The chancery court entered an agreed order for a divorce based upon irreconcilable differences, reserving for hearing all financial matters. Following a hearing, the chancellor granted Gloria assets with a net value of approximately $571,775.25 and awarded Gene net assets valued at approximately $260,147.98. Gene was also assigned marital debt of $21,547.81. Gloria appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Equitable distribution Gloria argues that the chancellor erred in the factual findings leading to the division of assets, i.e., finding her a healthy woman capable of employment. The chancellor made findings of fact for each of the required factors in making the distribution of marital assets, and the testimony and financial records submitted by the parties support them. Gloria submitted no evidence of ill-health and is a licensed registered nurse with the ability to earn a living even had she not been given the majority of the marital assets. Issue 2: Alimony Gloria argues she should have been awarded alimony, because her inability to obtain employment will prevent her from living in the manner to which she is accustomed, her health is poor, Gene's needs and obligations are considerably less than her own and Gene wasted assets throughout the marriage. Alimony need not be awarded where the division of marital assets in conjunction with nonmarital assets will adequately provide for a party. Gloria has at her disposal over $600,000 in assets with which to support herself, while Gene has under half that amount. Therefore, the chancellor did not abuse his discretion.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court