Covington v. Covington
| Docket Number: | 2009-CA-00802-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-14-2010 Opinion Author: Roberts, J. Holding: Dismissed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Modification of custody - Timeliness of appeal - Jurisdiction - M.R.A.P. 4(a) Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - DOMESTIC RELATIONS |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 03-05-2009 Appealed from: Harrison County Chancery Court Judge: Franklin C. McKenzie, Jr. Disposition: DENIED APPELLANT’S MOTIONS TO TERMINATE ALIMONY AND TO CHANGE CUSTODY OF CHILD Case Number: 03-02082(1) |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | William M. Covington |
WILLIAM M. COVINGTON III |
|
|
| Appellee: | Carol Montgomery (Covington) | DEAN HOLLEMAN | ||
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: | Modification of custody - Timeliness of appeal - Jurisdiction - M.R.A.P. 4(a) |
| Summary of the Facts: | William Covington filed motions to change custody and to reduce his obligations to pay child support and alimony to his ex-wife, Carol Montgomery. The court denied the motions. Covington secured an extension under M.R.A.P. 4 and filed his notice of appeal more than thirty days after the final judgment was entered. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | M.R.A.P. 4(a) requires that a notice of appeal shall be filed within thirty days of the filing of the judgment appealed from. However, a thirty-day extension may be granted for good cause. The record shows that Covington secured an extension and filed his notice of appeal within the extended deadline. However, the order granting him an extension had no effect as the chancellor granting the extension had recused himself from the case and had no authority to grant an extension. Because Covington is an attorney, the Supreme Court appointed a special chancellor “to preside and conduct proceedings in the above referenced case . . .” and listed the docket number of the case. Nothing in the Supreme Court’s order indicated that the special chancellor’s exclusive authority to preside over the case was relinquished prior to the chancery court losing jurisdiction over the matter, i.e. when a notice of appeal was filed. Because Covington failed to timely file his notice of appeal, the appellate court is without jurisdiction to hear the appeal. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
