Drake L. Lewis v. Tonia D. Lewis Pagel
172 So. 3d 162
| Miss. | 2015Background
- Drake and Tonia Lewis divorced (chancery court, 2008); issues included valuation/classification of Legacy Holdings, various real properties, child support, alimony, and contempt. Three children were minor at trial.
- Legacy Holdings, a closely held construction corporation 50/50 owned by the parties, was valued by the chancery court at trial but that valuation was partly based on exhibits the Court of Appeals found unreliable. Parties disputed whether Legacy had value, owned real property, or merely receivables.
- On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed parts of the property division and remanded to revalue Legacy (excluding goodwill) and to reclassify Swamp Road and St. Martin properties; this Court later clarified that goodwill is not divisible and encouraged use of a special master.
- On remand the chancery court (without a special master) found Legacy valueless except for accounts receivable, reclassified Swamp Road and St. Martin as Drake’s separate property, removed Lot 13 Hickory Hills, adjusted the equitable distribution, and awarded Tonia $100,000 lump-sum alimony.
- Separately, Drake moved to modify child support based on reduced income (loss of Legacy loan repayments); the chancery court denied modification, found Drake in contempt for unpaid child support arrearages, and awarded Tonia attorney’s fees. Drake appealed these rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Drake's Argument | Tonia's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether chancery court erred in equitable distribution on remand | Chancellor failed to analyze Ferguson factors and misvalued/classified assets to Drake’s detriment | Remand directives were followed; valuation and classifications were proper | Affirmed: chancery court complied with remand and Ferguson analysis; Legacy treated as valueless except receivables; reclassifications upheld |
| Whether lump-sum alimony award ($100,000) was proper | Lump-sum should not be awarded or chancellor misapplied standards | Award was a proper mechanism to equalize inequities post-division | Affirmed: award permissible; chancellor properly relied on Armstrong/Ferguson framework |
| Whether child support should be modified downward due to reduced income (loss of loan repayments) | Child support should be reduced because Legacy loan repayments ended and income decreased | No material change; payor still has earning capacity and assets | Reversed and remanded: chancery court erred by not considering removal of finite loan repayment from income; must reassess modification and any imputation with factual findings |
| Whether chancery court erred in finding Drake in contempt and awarding attorney’s fees | Contempt was purged by offsets (alimony/college payments); fees improper without McKee analysis | Drake willfully reduced child support; contempt and fees appropriate | Affirmed: willful reduction supported contempt; attorney’s fees appropriate in contempt context |
Key Cases Cited
- Singley v. Singley, 846 So. 2d 1004 (Miss. 2002) (business goodwill is not divisible marital property)
- Ferguson v. Ferguson, 639 So. 2d 921 (Miss. 1994) (factors governing equitable distribution)
- Armstrong v. Armstrong, 618 So. 2d 1278 (Miss. 1993) (factors for alimony awards)
- Lewis v. Lewis, 54 So. 3d 233 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009) (Court of Appeals remand directing revaluation and reclassification)
- Lewis v. Lewis, 54 So. 3d 216 (Miss. 2011) (Mississippi Supreme Court clarifying that goodwill cannot be included and remanding)
- Wallace v. Bond, 745 So. 2d 844 (Miss. 1999) (requirement to reference child-support guidelines and need to find material change for modification)
- Gray v. Gray, 745 So. 2d 234 (Miss. 1999) (imputing income must be supported by findings of fact)
- McBride v. Jones, 803 So. 2d 1168 (Miss. 2002) (child-support payments vest when due; modifications are prospective)