Brumfield v. Brumfield
2010 Miss. App. LEXIS 633
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2010Background
- Heather and Alex Brumfield married in 1998 and separated in 2007; chancery court granted irreconcilable differences divorce and awarded custody to Alex with both parents to share legal custody.
- Trial focused on Albright factors to determine the children's best interest; Heather appealed custody ruling.
- One domestic-violence incident occurred in September 2005; chancellor found it isolated and not enough to trigger the statutory presumption against custody with a history of family violence.
- Statutory presumption in Miss. Code Ann. § 93-5-24(9)(a)(i) was argued by Heather but the court did not find a history of family violence meeting the presumption.
- Chancellor concluded custody in favor of Alex based on Albright factors, considering Heather’s depression post-2005 and concerns about stability, home environment, and parenting.
- Dissent urged appointment of a guardian ad litem to assess children's best interests amid contested custody and alleged domestic-violence concerns.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the presumption against custody with a history of family violence applies | Brumfield contends there is a history of family violence triggering the presumption. | Brumfield argues the incident was isolated and did not meet the 'serious bodily injury' threshold. | Presumption not triggered; no history of family violence found. |
| Whether the Albright factors support custody with Alex | Heather argues Albright factors favor her custody and that the chancellor misweighed factors. | Court found all Albright factors favored or were neutral toward Alex, with weaknesses in Heather's stability and parenting. | Albright factors support custody in Alex; decision affirmed. |
| Whether Heather’s mental health and stability affected custody | Heather claims recovery from depression after 2005 and asserts stability and caregiving capacity. | Chancellor credited Alex’s ongoing caregiving role and Heather’s post-2005 instability and absences. | Heather's post-2005 instability weighed against her; Alex favored for stability. |
| Whether a guardian ad litem should have been appointed | Dissent argues GAL is needed to represent children's interests amid contested parenting fitness. | Majority did not deem GAL necessary to overturn custody ruling. | GAL not appointed; judgment affirmed (relevant to dissent). |
Key Cases Cited
- Albright v. Albright, 437 So.2d 1003 (Miss. 1983) (establishes Albright factors guiding best-interest custody determinations)
- J.P. v. S.V.B., 987 So.2d 975 (Miss. 2008) (requirement to address statutory presumption and factors when domestic violence present)
- Brekeen v. Brekeen, 880 So.2d 280 (Miss. 2004) (adultery can affect moral fitness but not custody absent impact on children)
- Carr v. Carr, 480 So.2d 1120 (Miss. 1985) (marital fault in custody awards; not controlling absent impact on children)
- Robison v. Lanford, 841 So.2d 1119 (Miss. 2003) (harms standard for appellate review of custody findings; substantial evidence required)
- Powell v. Ayars, 792 So.2d 240 (Miss. 2001) (necessity of supplemental findings in Albright-based custody review)