Cockrell, et al. v. Watkins
| Docket Number: | 2005-CA-00730-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-22-2006 Opinion Author: Ishee, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Child custody - Admissions - M.R.C.P. 36(a) - Mental/moral fitness - Family violence - Section 93-5-24(9)(a)(i) Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Southwick, Irving, Chandler, Griffis, Barnes and Roberts, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CUSTODY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 02-15-2005 Appealed from: Chickasaw County Chancery Court Judge: Kenneth M. Burns Disposition: FINAL JUDGMENT AWARDING CUSTODY TO PAUL WATKINS, JR. Case Number: 2004-0178-1B |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | James Cockrell and Susie P. Cockrell |
CARTER DOBBS |
||
| Appellee: | Paul Watkins, Jr. | JASON LEE SHELTON |
|
|
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: | Child custody - Admissions - M.R.C.P. 36(a) - Mental/moral fitness - Family violence - Section 93-5-24(9)(a)(i) |
| Summary of the Facts: | Brandon Watkins’ mother, Susie Ann Cockrell, was killed in an automobile accident. As Paul Watkins, Jr. never married Susie Ann Cockrell and has never been adjudicated to be the father of Brandon Watkins, James Cockrell and Susie Cockrell, Susie Ann Cockrell’s parents, brought suit seeking custody of Brandon. The chancellor granted legal and physical custody to Watkins, while granting visitation rights to the Cockrells. The Cockrells appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Admissions The Cockrells argue that the chancellor erred when he deemed that the Cockrells’ request for admissions was admitted, but failed to find such admissions dispositive of Watkins’s unfitness for custody of Brandon. Because Watkins failed to answer the Cockrells’ request for admissions within thirty days as required by M.R.C.P. 36(a), the chancellor deemed such matters to be admitted. The matter admitted was that Watkins was unfit to have custody of Brandon. However, the chancellor correctly stated that such admissions were not necessarily dispositive of the case, and that he was authorized, and even duty-bound, to review all evidence. Issue 2: Mental/moral fitness The Cockrells argue that the chancellor erred in finding Watkins morally and mentally fit for custody of Brandon. There was no evidence presented in the chancery court as to Watkins’s mental infirmity. In fact, there was testimony by Watkins’s pastor, his pastor’s wife, and several other witnesses that Watkins had changed his life for the better and regularly attended church. The chancellor applied the proper legal standard, and his findings were supported by substantial evidence. Issue 3: Family violence Section 93-5-24(9)(a)(i) creates a rebuttable presumption that it is not in the best interest of a child to be placed in the custody of a parent with a history of perpetrating violence against a family member. The Cockrells alleged three occurrences or series of occurrences which they argued constituted family violence within the meaning of the statute. The chancellor correctly stated that, even if such incidents had constituted family violence, which he found that they did not, the statute gave him the discretion to grant Watkins custody of Brandon if that parent is less likely to continue to perpetrate family violence. As all evidence presented involved alleged violence between Watkins and Susie Ann, such violence obviously would not be possible to continue. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
