Jackson v. Jackson
114 So. 3d 768
Miss. Ct. App.2013Background
- Paul and Linda married in 1991 and separated in 2011 after about twenty years of marriage.
- Linda owned the home and land subject to her parents’ life estate; Paul asserted no ownership interest.
- Linda filed for separate maintenance and sought use of the home, income-tax refund, and other relief; the court awarded $600/month and ancillary relief.
- The chancery court made no express findings on whether Linda’s misconduct contributed to the separation, nor on Linda’s burden of proof.
- Paul challenged the award on jurisdictional grounds and lack of corroboration, and argued the amount was excessive given Paul’s income.
- On appeal, the Mississippi Court of Appeals reversed and rendered, holding Linda failed to prove a separation without substantial fault and that the award lacked requisite findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Linda meet the jurisdictional requirements for separate maintenance? | Linda contends jurisdiction was satisfied by lack of significant fault by her and separation with abandonment by Paul. | Paul argues Linda failed to prove separation without substantial fault and that maintenance cannot be awarded absent such proof. | Court held Linda failed to prove a separation without significant fault; reversed. |
| Should the award stand absent corroboration of Linda’s case? | Linda contends corroboration is not required for separate maintenance. | Paul asserts absence of corroboration undermines the award. | Court held the award cannot stand due to lack of corroboration and missing findings. |
| If the award is sustainable, is the amount manifestly erroneous? | Linda argues the amount reflects appropriate maintenance under equitable principles. | Paul contends the amount is excessive relative to his income and standard of living. | Moot after reversal and rendering; issue not reached. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rodgers v. Rodgers, 349 So.2d 540 (Miss. 1977) (separate maintenance requires separation without fault by wife and willful abandonment by husband)
- Lynch v. Lynch, 616 So.2d 294 (Miss. 1993) (support/maintenance standards and related evidentiary considerations)
- Day v. Day, 501 So.2d 353 (Miss. 1987) (appellate review of findings when none expressly made)
- Pool v. Pool, 989 So.2d 920 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) (requisites for court's power to award equitable relief of separate maintenance)
- Daigle v. Daigle, 626 So.2d 140 (Miss. 1993) (six factors for determining amount of separate maintenance)
- Forthner v. Forthner, 52 So.3d 1212 (Miss. Ct. App. 2010) (equitable relief of separate maintenance requires no significant misconduct by requesting spouse)