Jenkins v. Jenkins
2011 Miss. App. LEXIS 369
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Kris and Bobby Jenkins married on November 18, 1999 and separated April 5, 2007; Bobby filed for divorce on irreconcilable differences and later amended to include habitual cruel and inhuman treatment or irreconcilable differences.
- The court entered an agreed temporary order; Kris later denied cruel treatment and irreconcilable differences in an answer filed January 2008.
- Discovery disputes arose, including quashing Kris's discovery and a protective order; Kris requested a stay on asset distribution pending information and valuation.
- On the same day as the motion in limine, the parties jointly moved for divorce on irreconcilable differences; a trial on property division followed.
- Trial evidence showed Bobby largely owned assets prior to marriage or funded improvements; Kris argued for different characterization and greater share.
- The chancellor equitably divided the marital property and Kris appealed alleging error in division, valuation, and valuation timing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the property division was an abuse of discretion | Kris contends the chancellor failed to properly classify assets and divided assets unfairly. | Bobby argues the division complied with Ferguson factors and reflected substantial evidence. | No reversible error; division upheld. |
| Whether expert valuation was required for assets | Kris argues the court should have appointed appraisers for several assets. | Bobby asserts valuation evidence was provided and Kris offered no valuations. | No abuse; chancellor’s valuations supported by record and lack of contrary valuations. |
| Whether the valuation date was properly chosen | Kris argues valuation should reflect the trial date. | Bobby contends valuation date lies within the chancellor’s discretion. | Valuation date within discretion; use of the temporary order date was proper. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hemsley v. Hemsley, 639 So.2d 909 (Miss. 1994) (assets acquired during marriage subject to equitable division)
- Ferguson v. Ferguson, 639 So.2d 921 (Miss. 1994) (ferguson factors guide equitable distribution)
- Seymour v. Seymour, 960 So.2d 513 (Miss.Ct.App. 2006) (equitable distribution seeks fair, not equal, division)
- Dunaway v. Dunaway, 749 So.2d 1112 (Miss.Ct.App. 1999) (chancellor not required to obtain appraisals; best effort determination)
- Redd v. Redd, 774 So.2d 492 (Miss.Ct.App. 2000) (valuation considerations and evidentiary sufficiency for property division)
- King v. King, 946 So.2d 395 (Miss.Ct.App. 2006) (valuation must precede division; initial step in asset valuation)