Susan Harris v. Thomas L. Harris
235 So. 3d 125
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Susan and Leon Harris divorced in 2011; their incorporated property-settlement agreement required Leon to pay Susan $2,755/month in periodic alimony (ending only on her remarriage or death).
- The Agreement did not specify sources of payment or address Social Security offsets.
- After the divorce, Susan began receiving $1,035/month in Social Security retirement benefits derived from Leon’s earnings record.
- Leon filed a counterclaim seeking reduction/termination of alimony or, alternatively, credit for the $1,035 Susan received from Social Security against his monthly alimony obligation.
- The chancellor ruled that Susan’s derivative Social Security benefits should be credited against Leon’s alimony obligation (so Leon would pay the $2,755 minus $1,035).
- Susan appealed, arguing the chancellor modified the Agreement without requiring Leon to prove a material change in circumstances and that the contract should be enforced as written.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Susan) | Defendant's Argument (Leon) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the chancellor erred by crediting Susan’s derivative Social Security benefits against Leon’s alimony without requiring proof of a material change in circumstances | The Agreement is an enforceable contract; altering payment by crediting Social Security is a modification that required a showing of material change not shown here | This is not a modification; court only clarified how payments may be satisfied since the Agreement didn’t specify payment sources — crediting derivative Social Security does not change Leon’s obligation amount | Court held no error: crediting derivative Social Security against alimony is permissible and did not require a material-change showing because the dollar obligation remained the same |
Key Cases Cited
- Spalding v. Spalding, 691 So. 2d 435 (Miss. 1997) (approving crediting of derivative Social Security against alimony by analogy to child-support offsets)
- Mooneyham v. Mooneyham, 420 So. 2d 1072 (Miss. 1982) (Social Security derivative payments should be credited against child-support obligations)
- Peebles v. Peebles, 153 So. 3d 728 (Miss. Ct. App. 2014) (property-settlement agreements are ordinarily enforced and not lightly modified)
- Clower v. Clower, 988 So. 2d 441 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) (periodic alimony may be modified for a material change in circumstances)