282 So.3d 1239
Miss. Ct. App.2019Background:
- Parties divorced in May 2016; their child custody and property settlement agreement was incorporated into the divorce decree.
- Agreement gave Jennifer custody of four children and required Chris to pay child support and private-school tuition "so long as the parties jointly agree for the children to be enrolled in private school."
- In March 2017 Jennifer petitioned to modify, alleging Chris threatened to stop paying tuition for one or two children and arguing the children should remain in private school.
- Chris testified he could not afford tuition for all four, had unpredictable income, and wanted the older two to finish private school while the younger two could attend public school.
- The chancery court ordered Chris to continue paying tuition for all four, finding he could afford it; Chris appealed.
- The Court of Appeals reversed and rendered: the settlement controlled, Chris need not pay for children he does not agree should attend private school, and Jennifer failed to prove a material, unforeseeable change in circumstances.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the chancery court could order Chris to continue paying private-school tuition contrary to the agreement requiring joint agreement | Jennifer: tuition is child support and court may order payment for all four children | Chris: agreement is a binding contract; no joint agreement exists so he is not required to pay; court should not modify contract based on his ability to pay | Reversed: agreement governs; Chris not required to pay for children he does not agree to enroll in private school; Jennifer failed to show material, unforeseeable change |
| Whether private-school tuition in a settlement is modifiable as child support | Jennifer: private-school tuition is part of child support and thus modifiable | Chris: characterized agreement term as contractual/property division and not subject to modification without meeting contract modification standards | Court: tuition is child-support in nature (thus generally modifiable), but here the agreement expressly contemplated the situation, so no unforeseeable material change was shown and modification was improper |
Key Cases Cited
- Campbell v. Campbell, 269 So. 3d 426 (Miss. Ct. App. 2018) (an agreed provision for a specific change prevents labeling that change as unforeseeable for modification purposes)
- Switzer v. Switzer, 460 So. 2d 843 (Miss. 1984) (an approved agreement becomes part of the final decree)
- East v. East, 493 So. 2d 927 (Miss. 1986) (marital property settlement is treated as a contract)
- Ivison v. Ivison, 762 So. 2d 329 (Miss. 2000) (courts disfavor efforts to modify settled property agreements)
- Tedford v. Dempsey, 437 So. 2d 410 (Miss. 1983) (court-approved child-support agreements are subject to modification under the same rules as post-trial awards)
- Finch v. Finch, 137 So. 3d 227 (Miss. 2014) (party seeking modification must prove a material, unforeseeable change in circumstances)
- Bruton v. Bruton, 271 So. 3d 528 (Miss. Ct. App. 2018) (private-school tuition is considered part of child support)
- Southerland v. Southerland, 816 So. 2d 1004 (Miss. 2002) (recognizing private-school costs as support-related)