Hill v. Brinkley
| Docket Number: | 2001-CA-01643-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-18-2003 Opinion Author: Bridges, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Paternity - Child support - Section 93-9-11 - Visitation Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - DOMESTIC RELATIONS |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-25-2001 Appealed from: Prentiss County Chancery Court Judge: John C. Ross, Jr. Disposition: BRINKLEY ORDERED TO PAY CHILD SUPPORT IN THE AMOUNT OF $35 PER WEEK AND GRANTED VISITATION RIGHTS AS THE NATURAL FATHER OF DANNY HILL. Case Number: 2001-0051 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Kimberly Hill, A Minor by and Through Danny Hill and Kathy Hill, Her Natural Parents |
GREG E. BEARD |
||
| Appellee: | Todd Brinkley, A Minor by and Through His Father and Next Friend, Kenneth Brinkley | GEORGE MARTIN VIA |
|
|
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: | Paternity - Child support - Section 93-9-11 - Visitation |
| Summary of the Facts: | Todd Brinkley brought an action to determine paternity of the child of Kimberley Hill, and Hill brought a cross-complaint seeking child support. The court found that Brinkley was the father of Hill's child and ordered him to pay child support of $35 per week. Hill filed a motion to reconsider asking that Brinkley be required to pay past-due child support, and Brinkley filed a response asking for visitation rights. The court denied Hill's motion and granted Brinkley visitation rights. Hill appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Child support Hill argues that the court erred in failing to require Brinkley to pay arrears of child support, because the statutory one-year limitation on the noncustodial parent's liabilities for past education and support is in actuality a period of mandatory support. Contrary to her argument, the plain meaning of section 93-9-11 is that if past support is required by the chancellor, then the most past support that the non-custodial parent can be liable for is one year. Issue 2: Visitation Hill argues that the court erred in granting Brinkley rights of overnight visitation with his child in his parents' home while Brinkley's parents were present, because Brinkley and his parents cannot provide the kind of care that she and her parents can. Although this explains why Hill is the parent with primary custody, it can hardly suffice to disqualify Brinkley from meaningful visitation rights with his child. Issue 3: Cross-appeal Brinkley cross-appeals both the issues of child support and visitation. With regard to child support, the court was within its discretion in not ordering Brinkley to pay child support as outlined in section 93-11-65. With regard to visitation, the chancellor has broad discretion in the determination of visitation and was within his discretion in this case in finding that there was some detriment to unsupervised visitation with the child. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
