MARY E. STEVENS APPELLANT
GINGER GRISSOM APPELLEE
OF JUDGMENT: 01/28/2016
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, HON. JUSTIN MILLER COBB, TRIAL JUDGE
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: GLENN S. SWARTZFAGER
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: ROBERT D. JONES
LEE, C.J., ISHEE AND GREENLEE, JJ.
In this appeal, we must determine whether the circuit court
properly dismissed Mary E. Stevens's complaint for
replevin. Finding no error, we affirm.
Mary's son, Michael Stevens, was married to Ginger
Grissom for fifteen years. The couple's divorce was
finalized in March 2014. On July 18, 2014, Mary filed a
complaint for replevin in the Lauderdale County County Court
against Ginger, claiming that Ginger was in wrongful
possession of Mary's personal property. Ginger filed an
answer and then a motion to dismiss. After a hearing, the
county court, finding that Mary failed to meet her burden of
proof, dismissed Mary's complaint with prejudice.
Mary then appealed to the Lauderdale County Circuit Court.
The circuit court affirmed the county court's decision.
Mary now appeals, asserting that the circuit court erred in
affirming the dismissal of her replevin action.
The property at issue included two rings, one cameo necklace,
and one carved wooden dog figurine. In her complaint, Mary
listed the value of the items as follows: a 1.31 carat
diamond ring valued at $9, 097.11; a .75 carat diamond ring
valued at $6, 013.04; a large cameo valued at $450; and the
dog figurine valued at $200. Mary had both rings appraised,
and the appraisals were attached to the complaint. The
appraisals were both dated April 21, 2004.
Mary contended she gave Michael the two rings and the cameo
for safekeeping. Ginger contended Mary gave her the rings and
the cameo as a Christmas present early in the couple's
marriage. And that Mary included appraisals for both rings
and the cameo. Ginger testified that the figurine had
belonged to Michael, and they displayed it in the marital
home. Ginger also testified that Michael and Mary removed
these items, among others, from the marital home after Ginger
and Michael separated. The chancellor presiding over Michael
and Ginger's divorce found Michael in contempt for
various reasons, one of which was removing the rings, the
cameo, and the figurine from the marital home. The chancellor
ordered those items returned to Ginger. And Ginger was
awarded these items in the final judgment of divorce. Both
the order finding Michael in contempt and the final judgment
of divorce were entered into evidence during the