Dobbins v. Coleman
| Docket Number: | 2004-CA-02365-SCT Linked Case(s): 2004-CA-02365-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 04-13-2006 Opinion Author: Dickinson, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Order of filiation - Medical expenses - Section 93-9-7 - Section 43-19-101(6) - Attorney’s fees - Section 93-9-45 Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller, P.J., Easley, Carlson and Graves, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Cobb, P.J., Diaz and Randolph, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - DOMESTIC RELATIONS |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-08-2004 Appealed from: DeSoto County Chancery Court Judge: Mitchell M. Lundy, Jr. Disposition: The chancellor determined that Mr. Coleman would be responsible for half of the Child’s medical expenses and Coleman was ordered to pay Dobbin's attorney’s fees. Case Number: 04-01-0069(ML) |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Nita Elaine Snyder Dobbins, Individually and as Natural Mother and Next Friend of the Infant Child Named in the Petition |
|||
| Appellee: | Johnny Lee Coleman |
|
||
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: | Order of filiation - Medical expenses - Section 93-9-7 - Section 43-19-101(6) - Attorney’s fees - Section 93-9-45 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Nita Dobbins gave birth to T.H.C. as a result of relations between herself and Johnny Coleman. Dobbins filed a Petition to Establish Paternity for Filiation, Child Support and Other Relief, asking the chancellor to make a determination of paternity, give her exclusive care, custody, and control of the child, and require Coleman to pay reasonable support and medical expenses. Coleman filed an Answer and Counter-Petition, admitting he was the child’s father, but denying sole responsibility for any expenses or medical bills. He requested the court give him visitation with the child and joint legal custody of the child. Coleman also claimed Dobbins should pay half the child’s medical expenses not covered by health insurance. In his Order of Filiation, the chancellor found Coleman was the natural father of the child. The chancellor awarded the parties joint legal custody, granted physical custody to Dobbins, and granted visitation rights to Coleman. The chancellor ordered Coleman to include the child under his group medical insurance and to continue the $200 per month support payments until a final hearing on the support matter. The chancellor entered an order making the parties equally responsible for the balances of the existing medical bills and requiring them to split all future medical bills. The chancellor also ordered Coleman to reimburse Dobbins for the reasonable attorney’s fees she incurred in bringing and maintaining her Petition. Dobbins appeals and Coleman cross-appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Medical expenses Dobbins argues that the chancellor committed reversible error by declaring section 93-9-7 unconstitutional and holding that the father of an illegitimate child cannot be made solely responsible for the past, present, and future medical expenses of his child. The parties’ arguments in this case rest on the assumption that the chancellor actually held that section 93-9-7 violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Looking carefully at the language of the Order, though, reveals that the chancellor did not declare any portion of the Mississippi Uniform Law on Paternity unconstitutional but rather correctly held that an interpretation of the statutes automatically holding the father solely responsible for all of his child’s medical expenses is impermissible. Section 93-9-7 plainly provides that someone like Coleman, the father of a child born out of lawful matrimony, is liable to the same extent as the father of a child born of lawful matrimony - no greater extent, no lesser extent. Nothing in the statutes or in our jurisprudence demands that the father of an illegitimate child be automatically liable for all of his child’s medical expenses. The chancellor correctly arrived at a permissible financial arrangement clearly contemplated by the statute where both parents share past and future medical expenses equally. The correct interpretation of section 93-9-7 requiring the father to automatically provide full medical support, and section 43-19-101(6) which requires reasonable medical support, demonstrates how the provisions compliment each other, rather than conflict with each other. Issue 2: Attorney’s fees Coleman argues that the chancellor’s award of attorney’s fees pursuant to section 93-9-45 was both unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and unreasonable in light of the facts. The first claim is procedurally barred for failure to raise the issue in the court below, while the second claim is without merit. Section 93-9-45 provides that when an Order of Filiation is entered by the court, the defendant will be assessed the cost of the legal services of the attorney representing the petitioner. Here, the chancellor was provided with an itemized account of all of Dobbins’ attorney’s fees and charges. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
