The opinion of the court was delivered by: Banks, Justice
DATE OF JUDGMENT: May 8, 1997
TRIAL JUDGE: HON. PAT H. WATTS, JR.
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: JACKSON COUNTY CHANCERY COURT
NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - DOMESTIC RELATIONS
DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED - January 28, 1999
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILE:
¶1. On remand from a previous appeal,*fn1 the chancery court re-evaluated distribution of the marital assets in light of Ferguson v. Ferguson and Chamblee v. Chamblee as mandated by this Court in Carrow I. We conclude that the present distribution was an equitable one, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
¶2. Betty Jean and Jimmie Carrow were divorced in March 1992 after 29 years of marriage. She was not granted an equitable distribution of the couple's property. After her motion to reconsider was denied by the trial court, Betty Jean (Jean) appealed to this Court. On September 4, 1994, this Court reversed and remanded the case to the Chancery Court of Jackson County to make an equitable distribution between Jean and Jimmie in light of Chamblee v. Chamblee, 637 So. 2d 850 (Miss. 1994) and Ferguson v. Ferguson, 639 So. 2d 921 (Miss. 1994). Carrow I, 642 So. 2d at 908. This trial for equitable distribution was conducted on December 10-11, 1996. On remand, Jean and Jimmie stipulated to the division of certain property as follows:
"1. That Jean Carrow shall be awarded the exclusive use, possession, and ownership of the Forts Lake, Jackson County, Mississippi, home, and she shall be responsible for any indebtedness thereon; "2. That Jimmie Carrow shall be awarded the exclusive use, possession, and ownership of the Grand Bay, Alabama, home, and he shall be responsible for any and all indebtedness thereon; "3. That Jean shall be awarded the exclusive use, possession, and ownership of her retirement/pension plan through her employment, and all benefits resulting therefrom, with such retirement/pension plan valued at $30,000; "4. That Jimmie Carrow shall be awarded the exclusive use, possession, and ownership of his retirement/pension plan through his employer, and all benefits resulting therefrom, with such retirement/pension plan valued at over $40,000."
¶3. The facts concerning the marriage of the parties, their accumulation of certain real and personal property, and the contribution of both parties in relation to such property are set forth in the previous decision of this Court. Based on this Court's findings and testimony of the both parties on remand, the chancery court determined the marital property subject to equitable distribution included the Market ...