Desselle v. Desselle


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2009-CA-00834-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 02-08-2011
Opinion Author: Lee, P.J.
Holding: Affirmed.

Additional Case Information: Topic: Divorce: Irreconcilable differences - Child custody - Albright factors - Expert testimony
Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Myers, P.J., Irving, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts and Maxwell, JJ.
Non Participating Judge(s): Carlton, J.
Procedural History: Bench Trial
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CUSTODY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 10-10-2008
Appealed from: PEARL RIVER COUNTY CHANCERY COURT
Judge: JOHNNY LEE WILLIAMS
Disposition: GRANTED IRRECONCILABLE-DIFFERENCES DIVORCE AND AWARDED PRIMARY CUSTODY OF TWO MINOR CHILDREN TO APPELLEE
Case Number: 07-0434-GN-W

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Ronald Desselle




JAMES R. HAYDEN



 

Appellee: Melissa Desselle RENEE M. PORTER  

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 - Child custody - Albright factors - Expert testimony

Summary of the Facts: Ronald and Melissa Desselle were granted an irreconcilable differences divorce. Melissa was given physical custody of the couple’s two children, and Ronald was ordered to pay $436 per month in child support. Ronald appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Albright factors Ronald argues that the chancellor misapplied the facts when weighing the Albright factors. In child-custody cases, the polestar consideration is the best interest of the child. The chancellor found the following five factors to favor neither party: age, health, and sex of the children; continuity of care; parenting skills; employment of the parents and the responsibilities of employment; and emotional ties of the parent and children. The preferences of the children were not considered since neither child was of an appropriate age to state a preference. The chancellor found that the following four factors favored Melissa: willingness and capacity to provide primary care; the moral fitness of the parents; the home, school, and community record of the children; and other relevant factors. The chancellor considered it significant that Melissa had taken the initiative to seek treatment for her emotional issues. She had also overcome several tragedies in her life while maintaining a job with a substantial salary. Ronald was favored in the following two factors: mental and physical health and age of the parents and stability of the home environment. The chancellor did not abuse his discretion in finding that Melissa should have primary custody of the children. The findings made by the experts were all consistent. They each found that Melissa was a good mother who had been victimized by an abusive husband, and the abuse had led to her treatment for depression. The chancellor’s findings were supported by substantial evidence. Issue 2: Expert testimony Ronald argues that the chancellor did not give sufficient weight to Dr. John Pat Galloway’s testimony that Ronald was the more stable parent. Dr. Galloway, a psychologist, was appointed by the chancellor to make a recommendation regarding child custody. Dr. Galloway had both positive and negative findings about Ronald and Melissa. Dr. Galloway’s only recommendation was that the children should be placed together. He found that both parents had the best interests of the children at heart. The chancellor did not abuse his discretion in the weight he gave to the expert’s testimony. While Dr. Galloway stated that Ronald’s home environment was more stable, he did not make a definitive recommendation. The testimony of the other experts was consistent with Dr. Galloway’s testimony.


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