Williams v. Williams
| Docket Number: | 2007-CT-01736-SCT Linked Case(s): 2007-CA-01736-SCT ; 2007-CA-01736-COA ; 2007-CA-01736-COA ; 2007-CT-01736-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-24-2010 Opinion Author: Randolph, J. Holding: Court of Appeals affirmed; Circuit Court reversed and rendered in part and reversed and remanded in part. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Divorce: Irreconcilable differences - Property settlement agreement - Attorney's fees Judge(s) Concurring: Carlson, P.J., Dickinson, Lamar and Chandler, JJ. Dissenting Author : Kitchens, J., Dissents With Separate Written Opinion Dissent Joined By : Waller, C.J., Graves, P.J., and Pierce, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - DOMESTIC RELATIONS Writ of Certiorari: yes Appealed from Court of Appeals |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-07-2007 Appealed from: Harrison County Chancery Court Judge: Sanford R. Steckler Disposition: The chancellor granted Julius's motion to modify the property settlement agreement purusant to their divorce. The Court of Appeals reversed and rendered in part and reversed and remanded in part. Case Number: 02-01865(3) |
|
| Note: | This judgment affirms a previous opinion by the Court of Appeals. See the original COA opinion at: http://www.mssc.state.ms.us/Images/Opinions/CO54389.pdf | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Julius Williams, II |
HERBERT J. STELLY, JR. |
|
|
| Appellee: | Barbara Williams | CAROL L. HENDERSON |
|
|
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 - Property settlement agreement - Attorney's fees |
| Summary of the Facts: | Julius and Barbara Williams were granted an irreconcilable differences divorce. The parties entered into a property-settlement agreement, which was ratified by the court in conjunction with the divorce judgment. After Julius remarried, Barbara moved to clarify judgment and/or for modification of the property-settlement agreement, specifically the paragraph entitled, “Survivor Benefit for Wife.” The chancellor entered a qualified domestic-relations order directing Julius, to complete the necessary documents so that Barbara would receive Military Survivor Benefit Plan benefits upon his death. The Court of Appeals reversed the chancellor’s judgment. The Supreme Court granted certiorari. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Property settlement agreement When the parties have reached an agreement and the chancery court has approved it, the appellate court ought to enforce it and take a dim view of efforts to modify it. Thus, the agreement of the parties in this case should be enforced. It did not obligate Julius Williams to pay Barbara Williams military-survivor benefits. The property settlement did not provide her this benefit, nor is it accorded to her by law. Military-survivor benefits are conspicuously absent from the parties’ agreement. Further, equity does not require the result dictated by the trial court. Issue 2: Attorney’s fees Generally the award of attorney’s fees in a divorce case is left to the discretion of the trial court. Thus, the chancellor should determine the attorney-fee amount on remand in light of this opinion. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
