222 So. 3d 1101
Miss. Ct. App.2017Background
- Suzann and Greg Davis divorced in 2011 with a property, custody, and child-support agreement; Suzann retained physical custody of all three children and initially did not seek child support from Greg.
- The decree was modified by consent in 2012 and again in 2013 after Suzann moved to South Carolina; the 2013 consent order gave Greg custody of the middle child, set monthly support at $1,000 (to increase to $1,750 under certain conditions), and stated Greg’s child-support payments were his only support obligation to Suzann aside from specified medical obligations.
- Greg was convicted in 2014 of fraud/embezzlement-related offenses and testified he was having difficulty obtaining employment thereafter.
- Suzann sought further modification of custody, contempt for Greg’s missed payments (including monthly lump-sum alimony installments), and attorney’s fees; Greg sought modification of child support due to the apparent emancipation or estrangement of the eldest child.
- The chancery court denied Suzann’s requested relief, found a $30,000 payment from Greg satisfied arrearage in lump-sum alimony (with a remaining balance credited but not replacing future payments), recalculated child support under Mississippi Code § 43-19-101 to require Greg to pay $564/month (offset by Suzann’s obligation to pay support for the child living with Greg), and declined to hold Greg in contempt or award fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Davis) | Defendant's Argument (Greg) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether child support may be modified absent a material change in circumstances | Suzann: no material change since the 2013 agreed modification; court should not reduce Greg’s obligations | Greg: his income changed after conviction and loss of anticipated employment, justifying recalculation under statutory guidelines | Court: modification permissible; Greg’s conviction and loss of expected income were a material change and recalculation under § 43-19-101 was appropriate (net obligation $564/month) |
| Whether lump-sum alimony may be included as income when computing child support | Suzann: lump-sum alimony paid in installments should not be treated as income for support calculations | Greg: lump-sum alimony may be considered income when applying § 43-19-101 | Court: chancellor has discretion to include lump-sum alimony as income; no abuse of discretion here |
| Whether Greg is in civil contempt for unpaid alimony and whether fees should be awarded | Suzann: Greg failed to make required monthly lump-sum alimony payments and should be held in contempt and pay attorney’s fees | Greg: he made a $30,000 payment after sale of the home which covered arrearage and tendered an amount greater than owed at hearing | Court: denial of contempt and fee award affirmed; chancellor reasonably found arrearage satisfied and no ongoing default at hearing |
| Whether support offsets apply when parents each have custody of different children | Suzann: offsets should not reduce Greg’s liability to her | Greg: when each parent has custody of different children, the higher-income parent pays only the difference between obligations | Court: applied offset principle; ordered Suzann to pay support for child living with Greg and offset amounts, reducing Greg’s net obligation |
Key Cases Cited
- Wallace v. Bond, 745 So. 2d 844 (Miss. 1999) (party seeking modification must show material change of circumstances)
- McEachern v. McEachern, 605 So. 2d 809 (Miss. 1992) (same rule on modification burden)
- Lahmann v. Hallman, 722 So. 2d 614 (Miss. 1998) (voluntary income reduction does not justify modification; contempt discretion explained)
- Reid v. Reid, 998 So. 2d 1032 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) (when parents each have custody of separate children, court may order offset of support obligations)
- Neville v. Neville, 734 So. 2d 352 (Miss. Ct. App. 1999) (discusses whether lump-sum alimony in installments is includable in income calculations)