White v. Miss. Dep't of Human Servs.
| Docket Number: | 2009-CA-00537-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 07-20-2010 Opinion Author: Barnes, J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Contempt - Increase in child support - IRS filing status Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Griffis, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - DOMESTIC RELATIONS |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 03-23-2009 Appealed from: PIKE COUNTY CHANCERY COURT Judge: Debbra K. Halford Disposition: HELD WILLIAM T. WHITE IN CONTEMPT FOR FAILURE TO PAY PREVIOUSLY ORDERED CHILD SUPPORT Case Number: 2004-61 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | William T. White |
PRO SE |
|
|
| Appellee: | Mississippi Department of Human Services | RUSSELL WILLIAM HOLMES | ||
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: | Contempt - Increase in child support - IRS filing status |
| Summary of the Facts: | The Mississippi Department of Human Services filed a petition for contempt against William White on behalf of Tracey Farrell because she is a recipient of services through Title IV-D of the Social Security Act. White and Farrell are the parents of two minor children. The court found White in contempt for failure to pay child-support payments. White appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Increase in child support White argues that the effective date of the increase in child support from $500 to $670 was May 1, 2008, rather than March 1, 2008, because the chancery court did not enter its written order until April 18, 2008. The April 18, 2008 order did not specify the beginning date of the increase. The order and the bench opinion both state that the increase will be on the first and fifteenth of the month, without specifying which month the increase was to start. The previous orders had stated the beginning date of the increase. White was personally present before the chancery court in February and heard the chancellor specifically state that the increase was to begin the first of the month. The chancery court found that the effective date of the change was March 1, 2008. This factual finding was not erroneous. As it would have been within the discretion of the chancellor to award the increase in child support retroactively to the date the petition was filed, there was no error in her decision to award the increase retroactively to the first month following the hearing and bench opinion. While White may not have been held in contempt for failing to pay the ambiguous order, there is no doubt that White did not pay child support under any of the court’s orders and that he was in contempt regardless of the start date of the new obligation. In contempt actions involving unpaid child support, a prima facie case of contempt has been established when the party entitled to receive support introduces evidence that the party required to pay the support has failed to do so. Issue 2: IRS filing status At the contempt hearing, Farrell claimed that she had filed her 2007 income-tax return prior to the hearing in February 2008. White argues that Farrell’s testimony alone was insufficient to show that she properly claimed her children as dependents and that Farrell should have been required to produce the 2007 income - tax return to prove that the return was actually filed prior to the hearing. Although it would have been preferable for Farrell to have offered written proof at the hearing, there is no contrary testimony or documentation to support White’s argument. Issue 3: Contempt Although White argues that the chancery court erred in holding him in contempt for failure to pay $250, which had previously been part of the basis for a contempt proceeding, there is no specific indication that this was the case. A review of White’s payments for 2008 show that White failed to pay his court-ordered obligations for several months. There is clear indication that White failed in his obligation to pay child support more than once. There is clear and substantial evidence to support a contempt finding by the chancery court. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
