Parker v. Bliven


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2009-CP-00470-COA
Linked Case(s): 2009-CP-00470-COA ; 2009-CT-00470-SCT

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 10-26-2010
Opinion Author: Griffis, J.
Holding: Affirmed.

Additional Case Information: Topic: Modification of child support - Due process - Contempt - M.R.A.P. 4(a) - Attorney's fees
Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ.
Procedural History: Bench Trial
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - DOMESTIC RELATIONS

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 02-25-2009
Appealed from: Lamar County Chancery Court
Judge: Sebe Dale, Jr.
Disposition: HELD PARKER IN CONTEMPT FOR CHILD-SUPPORT ARREARAGE AND AWARDED ATTORNEY’S FEES
Case Number: 2006-0028-GN-D

  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: Robert S. Parker




PRO SE



 
  • Appellant #1 Brief
  • Appellant #1 Reply Brief

  • Appellee: Tessecca Bliven SHEILA HAVARD SMALLWOOD  

    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 child support - Due process - Contempt - M.R.A.P. 4(a) - Attorney's fees

    Summary of the Facts: Robert Parker filed a petition for modification of child support and custody. Tessecca Bliven filed her responsive pleading and a counterclaim. The chancellor dismissed Parker’s petition and entered a judgment on Bliven’s counterclaim. Parker appeals.

    Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Due process Parker argues that he was deprived of his right to due process when his counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel and when Parker represented himself pro se. The rights to appointed counsel and to effective assistance of counsel do not apply in civil proceedings. Thus, Parker’s due-process rights were not violated. Issue 2: Contempt Parker argues that the chancellor erred when he found that Parker was in contempt, that Parker had unclean hands, and when the chancellor dismissed Parker’s two prior petitions. Parker’s arguments are without merit because these issues were not presented to the chancellor for his consideration. Issue 3: Child support Parker argues that the chancellor erred because the amount of the child-support award was outside of the Mississippi Child-Support Guidelines. The award of $300 per month in child support was set in the April 26, 2007, judgment. Parker did not appeal the April 26, 2007, judgment. Because Parker failed to appeal the judgment within thirty days as required by M.R.A.P. 4(a), this issue is without merit.


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