Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

McCall v. McCall

Court of Appeals of Mississippi

January 29, 2019

KEVIN B. McCALL APPELLANT
v.
CYNTHIA C. McCALL APPELLEE

          DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07/26/2017

          WALTHALL COUNTY CHANCERY COURT, HON. DEBBRA K. HALFORD JUDGE

          ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: CHAD KENNETH KING MATTHEW THOMPSON

          ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: MARK R. HOLMES ALTON LAMAR WATTS

         EN BANC.

          GRIFFIS, C.J.

         ¶1. In 2014, Cynthia and Kevin McCall were divorced on the ground of irreconcilable differences. Their property-settlement agreement required Kevin to pay $3, 500 per month in child support and required Kevin to make an additional lump-sum child-support payment of $100, 000.

         ¶2. In October 2016, Kevin filed for modification of his child-support obligation. The chancellor determined that Kevin was in arrears on his child-support obligation in the sum of $198, 205.82. Cynthia responded to the motion and filed a counterclaim, asking the court to find Kevin in contempt for his failure to pay his child-support obligation. The chancellor denied the modification and found Kevin in contempt of court. The chancellor entered a judgment that increased Kevin's monthly obligation by $1, 000 and awarded Cynthia attorney's fees. It is from this judgment that Kevin now appeals.

         FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         ¶3. Kevin and Cynthia McCall were married for thirteen years. They had two children born of the marriage.

         ¶4. In April 2014, the McCalls were granted a divorce on the ground of irreconcilable differences. The McCalls agreed upon, and the chancellor accepted, a property-settlement agreement that was signed by both parties.[1] In the agreement, Kevin and Cynthia agreed that Cynthia would have full legal and physical custody of the children. The agreement also provided that Kevin would pay child support in monthly payments of $3, 500 and a lump-sum payment of $100, 000, due on May 15, 2014.

         ¶5. On June 11, 2014, Cynthia filed a Petition for Citation for Criminal and Civil Contempt. In the petition, Cynthia alleged, among other claims, that Kevin McCall had failed to pay the lump sum child support payment of $100, 000 by May 15, 2014, as agreed.

         ¶6. On August 6, 2014, Kevin filed a Response to Petition for Citation for Contempt and Counter-Petition for Modification of Judgment of Divorce and/or Relief from Judgment under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). The chancellor entered an order, dated November 7, 2014, that denied Kevin's Petition for Relief from Judgment under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 60 (b). Kevin did not file a timely appeal.

         ¶7. In April 2015, Kevin and Cynthia were before the court on a contempt motion. In an agreed order, Kevin was cited for contempt. Kevin agreed that he was in arrears on monthly child-support payments in the sum of $21, 955 and the $100, 000 lump-sum payment.

         ¶8. In March 2016, Kevin filed a motion for modification of his child-support obligation. He argued that he lost ownership of a sawmill[2] he owned in Texas as the basis for his material change of circumstances. The chancellor denied the motion and found Kevin in contempt of court. Kevin now appeals this judgment.

         STANDARD OF REVIEW

         ¶9. In Evans v. Evans, 994 So.2d 765, 768 (¶9) (Miss. 2008), the Mississippi Supreme Court held that "[d]omestic-relations matters are reviewed under the limited substantial-evidence/manifest-error rule. A chancellor's findings will not be disturbed 'unless the chancellor was manifestly wrong, clearly erroneous or an erroneous legal standard was applied.'" (Citations omitted).

         ANALYSIS

         ¶10. The review of a chancellor's decision on the modification of child support begins with several general statements of applicable law. In Evans, the court ruled that:

There can be no modification of a child support decree absent a substantial and material change in the circumstances of one of the interested parties arising subsequent to the entry of the decree sought to be modified. The change must occur as a result of after-arising circumstances of the parties, not reasonably anticipated at the time of the agreement. Some of the factors which may be considered in determining whether a material change has taken place include:
(1) increased needs caused by advanced age and maturity of the children; (2) increase in expenses; (3) inflation; (4) the relative financial condition and earning capacity of the parties; (5) the health and special needs of the child, both physical and psychological; (6) the health and special medical needs of the parents, both physical and psychological; (7) the necessary living expenses of the non-custodial parent; (8) the estimated amount of income taxes the respective parties must pay on their incomes; (9) the free use of a ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.