Irving v. Irving, 67 So. 3d 776

James Craig Irving and Johnnie Evans Irving divorced in 2002; chancery court later modified child support.
Nov. 5, 2008, Chancellor Cobb heard an arrearage matter; on Dec. 3, 2008, she entered an order increasing James's support nunc pro tunc to Nov. 5, 2008.
James lost his job on Nov. 14, 2008 but did not notify the court of the change in circumstances.
Johnnie filed contempt and James sought modification of support in 2009 based on the job loss.
Chancellor Lynchard granted partial dismissal on res judicata grounds, restricting evidence to events after Dec. 3, 2008; later orders clarified this.
The Mississippi Supreme Court reversed, holding res judicata did not bar evidence of the post-order job loss and remanded.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether res judicata bars evidence of job loss for modification	Irving argues the 2008 nunc pro tunc order made the job loss postorder and not litigated.	Irving contends the loss occurred before effective date; res judicata bars the claim.	Res judicata does not bar the post-order job loss evidence.

Quinn v. Estate of Jones, 818 So.2d 1148 (Miss.2002) (identity elements for res judicata)
Dunaway v. W.H. Hopper & Assoc., Inc., 422 So.2d 749 (Miss.1982) (res judicata elements)
Green v. Myrick, 171 So. 774 (Miss.1937) (nunc pro tunc effect)
Thrash v. Thrash, 385 So.2d 961 (Miss.1980) (nunc pro tunc doctrine)
Henderson v. Henderson, 27 So.3d 462 (Miss.Ct.App.2010) (appellate treatment of nunc pro tunc and effective date)
Howard v. Howard, 968 So.2d 961 (Miss.Ct.App.2007) (preclusion of claims on res judicata in modification context)
Leiden v. Leiden, 902 So.2d 582 (Miss.Ct.App.2004) (material change in circumstances; unforeseeable at decree)
Cannon v. Cannon, 571 So.2d 976 (Miss.1990) (Rule 59/60 considerations for relief from judgment)
In re D.N.T., 843 So.2d 690 (Miss.2003) (nunc pro tunc: now for then; retroactive effect on record)