Stephen J Bullock v. Alaina L. Bullock
218 So. 3d 265
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Stephen and Alaina Bullock married in 1999, separated in 2007, and divorced in 2015 after a multi-year, interrupted trial that began in 2010.
- Disputes at trial were limited by agreement to classification/division of: the Eagle Point property, a $100,000+ investment in Landing Gear, and a ~$120,000 loan to Coast Cycle World; other assets were resolved by agreement.
- Stephen claimed the loan and investment were funded with his separate (nonmarital) funds but produced little documentary tracing and gave inconsistent testimony; Alaina’s expert produced a detailed report using June 2010 as the cut-off date.
- Stephen belatedly produced a disorganized box of discovery; the trial court initially excluded the materials, agreed to reopen the case if Stephen complied with conditions, but Stephen failed to follow the court’s procedures and did not appear at the reopening hearing.
- The chancery court (final judgment) used the date of divorce as the cut-off for accumulation, classified Eagle Point as Alaina’s separate property, found the loan and investment marital, split the loan/investment 50/50, denied spousal support, and ordered Stephen to pay portions of expert and attorney fees related to reopening the case.
Issues
| Issue | Bullock (Appellant) Argument | Bullock (Appellee) Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper date to end accumulation of marital estate | Court should have used earlier date (trial start or other) | Date of judgment is within chancellor’s discretion and acceptable | Affirmed: date of judgment acceptable given facts and discretion |
| Classification of Eagle Point property | Property became marital (use as collateral; boat ramp improvement) | Property remained Alaina’s separate property | Affirmed: Eagle Point is nonmarital |
| Classification of Landing Gear investment & Coast Cycle World loan | Investment/loan were made with Stephen’s separate funds and should be nonmarital | Presumption of marital property not overcome; Stephen failed to trace separate funds | Affirmed: loan and investment are marital |
| Admission of belated discovery & sanctions (attorney/expert fees) | Court erred in excluding/checking evidence and awarding fees | Exclusion and fee awards justified by discovery abuse and failure to comply | Affirmed: exclusion appropriate (Stephen forfeited reopening by noncompliance); fee awards appropriate |
| Application of Ferguson factors in division | Chancellor failed to perform Ferguson analysis on record | 50/50 split acceptable but must be supported on record | Reversed/remanded: Ferguson analysis required on record for equitable distribution |
Key Cases Cited
- Ferguson v. Ferguson, 639 So. 2d 921 (Miss. 1994) (requires chancellor to apply Ferguson factors on the record for equitable distribution)
- Lowrey v. Lowrey, 25 So. 3d 274 (Miss. 2009) (point of demarcation for marital assets may be date of separation or date of divorce)
- Collins v. Collins, 112 So. 3d 428 (Miss. 2013) (chancellor has discretion to use date of divorce as cut-off)
- Hemsley v. Hemsley, 639 So. 2d 909 (Miss. 1994) (presumption that assets acquired during marriage are marital)
- Segree v. Segree, 46 So. 3d 861 (Miss. 2010) (failure to perform Ferguson analysis on record precludes meaningful appellate review)