Clarence Samples v. Sara Davis
| Docket Number: | 2003-CA-00524-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-16-2004 Opinion Author: Randolph, J. Holding: Vacated and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Modification of custody - Consent agreement - Unif.Chan.Ct.R. 5.03 - Unif.Chan.Ct.R. 3.09 Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller and Cobb, P.JJ., Easley, Carlson and Dickinson, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz and Graves, JJ. Procedural History: Agreed Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - DOMESTIC RELATIONS |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-12-2002 Appealed from: Covington County Chancery Court Judge: J. Larry Buffington Disposition: Entered a judgment by the parties. Case Number: 95-302 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Clarence Samples |
RENEE M. PORTER |
||
| Appellee: | Sara Davis | NANCY E. STEEN |
|
|
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 - Consent agreement - Unif.Chan.Ct.R. 5.03 - Unif.Chan.Ct.R. 3.09 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Clarence Samples and Sara Davis were divorced in 1995. In 1997, Samples filed for a modification of the transportation provisions regarding visitation in the judgment of divorce. Davis filed a cross-complaint for modification seeking an increase child support. In 1998, Samples filed a petition for modification of child custody and child support based on the older child’s election; however, after the child withdrew his election, Samples withdrew his petition. The parties entered into an agreed judgment of modification. In 1999, Samples filed a motion for citation of contempt, to enforce visitation, and reduce child support, asking the court to cite Davis in contempt due to her failure to allow Samples visitation and telephone contact with the two children. Samples further requested a decrease in child support due to a decline in income. In 2000, Samples filed an amended complaint incorporating his previous claims for relief, but also seeking a modification of physical custody of the children. Davis counter-claimed to cite Samples in contempt. A petition for contempt and other relief was filed against Samples on behalf of Davis by the Department of Human Services, based upon an alleged failure to pay child support. In 2001, Samples filed an amended complaint seeking damages from Davis based on alienation of affection and interference of business. Davis filed a motion for enforcement of settlement, or alternatively, for trial setting and sanctions. The chancellor signed the judgment, and Samples appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Samples argues that the court erred by approving and signing a consent judgment which was not approved or signed by Samples or his attorney. According to Uniform Chancery Court Rule 5.03, every consent judgment must be approved and signed by counsel for all parties to the suit who may be represented by counsel and interested in or affected thereby before being presented to the chancellor for his signature. Rule 3.09 provides that oral agreements of counsel made in the presence of the court must be recorded by the court reporter or an order entered in accordance therewith approved by counsel. A party is bound by an agreement where the terms of the agreement are announced in open court and dictated into the record. In this case, no terms were ever announced in open court and recorded by the court reporter; furthermore, no agreement was signed by Samples or his attorney. If there was an oral agreement, it should have been recorded by the court reporter or reduced to writing and approved by Samples’ counsel. Neither of these methods were employed. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
