332 So.3d 365
Miss. Ct. App.2021Background
- Parties divorced in 2014 by irreconcilable differences; final judgment incorporated an agreement awarding joint legal custody, physical custody of both children to LaDonna, and Essie to pay $600/month child support.
- In 2019 LaDonna lived for a period in Texas; from April–July 2019 both children lived with Essie and Essie provided for their expenses.
- By late 2019–2020 Ryan (age 16 at trial) spent most days at Essie’s home, preferred to live with Essie, and testified that LaDonna frequently yelled at him and had once locked him outside the house.
- Chancellor found a material and adverse change in the custodial home, applied the Albright factors, transferred physical custody of Ryan to Essie, and altered child-support obligations (reduced Essie’s payment and ordered LaDonna to pay Essie).
- On appeal the Court of Appeals affirmed the custody modification (findings supported by substantial credible evidence) but reversed the child-support modification for lack of financial evidence and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (LaDonna) | Defendant's Argument (Essie) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was a material, adverse change in circumstances warranting a custody modification | Insufficient evidence that conditions at LaDonna’s home materially changed or adversely affected Ryan; chancellor misapplied Albright | Recurrent conflict, the lock-out incident, continuity of care at father’s home, and Ryan’s expressed preference show a material adverse change and best-interest basis for modification | Affirmed—chancellor’s credibility findings and totality-of-circumstances analysis supported a material adverse change and best-interest custody modification |
| Whether the chancellor properly modified child-support without financial disclosures | No financial affidavits, tax returns, or income evidence were presented; support modification unsupported | Modification was appropriate in light of custody change and changed circumstances (and original amount derived from parties’ agreement) | Reversed and remanded—record lacked incomes/expenses required to apply statutory child-support guidelines; parties must present financial evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Albright v. Albright, 437 So. 2d 1003 (Miss. 1983) (lists factors for custody determinations)
- Bredemeier v. Jackson, 689 So. 2d 770 (Miss. 1997) (requires that a material change must also adversely affect the child)
- Tedford v. Dempsey, 437 So. 2d 410 (Miss. 1983) (modification of support provisions in settlement agreements follows same rules as contested awards)
- Dixon v. Olmstead, 296 So. 3d 227 (Miss. Ct. App. 2020) (discusses child-support guideline presumption and calculation framework)
- Munday v. McLendon, 287 So. 3d 303 (Miss. Ct. App. 2019) (totality of circumstances can establish a material change)
- Smith v. Smith, 318 So. 3d 484 (Miss. Ct. App. 2021) (standard of review for custody-modification rulings)