John Mark Riley, Jr. v. Betty Merandy Russell Riley
196 So. 3d 1159
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- John Mark Riley Jr. and Betty Riley divorced in 2006; their divorce incorporated a custody/support/property agreement and they later entered an agreed order of modification in 2012.
- The 2012 agreed order required, if the children attended Prentiss Christian School, that Father enroll the children under his account and allocate tuition shares among Father, Mother, and Candy (John’s wife) (one-third each under the original arrangement).
- Betty paid $30,300.40 for the four children’s tuition after they attended Prentiss Christian School; Candy withdrew her two children before the 2012–2013 year and made no contribution. John made no tuition payments and never enrolled the children under his account as required.
- Betty filed a petition for contempt (July 2014) alleging John failed to provide required health insurance and failed to pay his share of private-school tuition; John answered and filed his own petition for modification and contempt.
- The chancery court found John in open and willful contempt, ordered him to: (a) pay $15,150.20 (one-half of the tuition Betty paid), (b) provide health insurance for the children, (c) pay $2,000 in attorney’s fees to Betty, and (d) be jailed until he purged contempt by paying $17,150.20 and securing insurance. John appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contempt for failure to pay private-school tuition | Betty: John failed to comply with the modification and owes tuition share; Betty sought reimbursement | John: Condition precedent not met — no evidence children chose to attend Prentiss Christian School; also argued the one-third allocation should control | Court affirmed contempt finding; children had attended the school previously, John failed to enroll/list under his account and paid nothing; court equitably ordered John to pay one-half of tuition paid by Betty |
| Trial court award of attorney’s fees (trial level) | Betty: Fees necessary to make her whole for enforcing the order | John: No proof of Betty’s attorney’s fees presented at hearing; award improper | Court affirmed $2,000 award; under Miss. Code §9-1-41 and controlling precedent, court may award reasonable fees based on pleadings, hearing, and judge’s experience without itemized proof |
| Appellate attorney’s fees | Betty: Requests one-half of trial award on appeal ($1,000) | John: (implicit) appellate fees should not be awarded absent need or other basis | Appellate court awarded $1,000 (one-half of trial award), reasoning appellate fees are routinely awarded at one-half and financial-need findings are not required in contempt actions |
Key Cases Cited
- Bounds v. Bounds, 935 So. 2d 407 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006) (scope of review in domestic cases)
- Witters v. Witters, 864 So. 2d 999 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004) (contempt upheld where supported by substantial credible evidence)
- Finch v. Finch, 137 So. 3d 227 (Miss. 2014) (trial courts have wide latitude in equitable remedies in domestic relations)
- Moseley v. Smith, 180 So. 3d 667 (Miss. Ct. App. 2014) (under §9-1-41 court may award fees based on information before it and judge’s experience without detailed proof)
- McKee v. McKee, 418 So. 2d 764 (Miss. 1982) (factors for attorney’s-fee assessment in domestic cases)
- Huseth v. Huseth, 135 So. 3d 846 (Miss. 2014) (attorney’s fees proper in contempt actions regardless of need)
- Parker v. Bliven, 59 So. 3d 619 (Miss. Ct. App. 2010) (appellate award of one-half of trial-level attorney’s fees in contempt context)