Myers v. Myers
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-00326-COA Linked Case(s): 2002-CT-00326-SCT ; 2002-CT-00326-SCT ; 2002-CT-00326-SCT ; 2002-CA-00326-COA ; 2002-CA-00326-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-16-2003 Opinion Author: Chandler, J. Holding: REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Separate maintenance - Sale of marital home Judge(s) Concurring: King, P.J., Bridges, Lee and Griffis, JJ. Dissenting Author : Southwick, P.J. Dissent Joined By : McMillin, C.J., Thomas and Myers, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: Irving, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - DOMESTIC RELATIONS |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 02-18-2002 Appealed from: Bolivar County Chancery Court Judge: William Willard Disposition: JUDGMENT AWARDING SEPARATE MAINTENANCE AND OTHER RELIEF. Case Number: 2000-0186 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Demetra P. Myers |
PHILIP MANSOUR |
||
| Appellee: | Mark E. Myers | LINDSEY C. MEADOR |
|
|
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: | Separate maintenance - Sale of marital home |
| Summary of the Facts: | The motion for rehearing is denied, and this opinion is substituted for the original opinion. Mark Myers was ordered to provide to his wife, Demetra Myers, separate maintenance of $600 per month along with other expenses. The court also ordered the parties to sell their marital home and use the proceeds to purchase a more affordable house. Demetra appeals, and Mark cross-appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Marital home Demetra argues that the court had no authority to require the parties to sell the marital home, because the sale amounted to a divestiture of title to a marital asset. Separate maintenance is a judicial command to the husband to resume cohabitation with his wife, or in default thereof, to provide suitable maintenance of her until such time as they may be reconciled to each other. To enforce the partition of the marital home is contrary to public policy which encourages marriage. Because the chancellor's ruling to partition the land was more permanent than necessary, this issue is reversed. Issue 2: Separate maintenance Mark argues that the award of separate maintenance was excessive. Factors the court should consider when making an award of separate maintenance include the health of both husband and wife; their combined earning capacity; the reasonable needs of the wife and children; the necessary living expenses of the husband; the fact that the wife has free use of the home and furnishings; and any other facts and circumstances. The problem in this case stems from the enormous financial obligations of both parties which is magnified by them living separately. Decreasing the amount of separate maintenance is not the proper solution. The award is equitable due to Demetra's poor health and the great disparity between their respective incomes. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
