Posted On: July 3, 2008 by Robert Kisselburgh

Mississippi Court tells wife no alimony after multi-million dollar property award

No alimony for wife after mulit-million dollar property settlement

In a case this week out of Jackson County, Mississippi, the parties, who were married for 33 years, agreed to a divorce and a property settlement which divided the martial estate of just over 5.1 million dollars almost equally. But the parties submitted the matter of alimony to the chancellor for decision. The chancellor awarded the wife $7,000 per month in periodic alimony. On the first appeal, the Mississippi Court of Appeals reversed the chancellor's decision because she failed to justify the alimony award and asked her to make specific findings as to why the wife needed the alimony after getting more than one-half of a multi-million dollar estate.

Well, it seems the Mississippi Court of Appeals was again displeased with the chancellor's ruling when she again awarded permanent periodic alimony in the amount of $7,000 a month to the wife. The Court of Appeals, in a 6-4 decision, reversed and rendered saying that the wife was not entitled to alimony as the chancellor failed to justify the award.

Gavel%20and%20lawbook.jpg

The majority opinion said the chancellor failed to make specific findings as to why the wife's property settlement of more than two million dollars did not eliminate her need for alimony. The Court stated:

"Inasmuch as alimony should only be awarded when the division of the marital estate leaves one party in a deficit, we find that the record simply does not support the chancellor's award."

The dissent pointed out that the wife had been unemployed for 25 years and the husband was a successful doctor with a lucrative practice. In the opinion of the dissent, the alimony award was justified given the age of the parties, the great disparity in income of the parties, and the lifestyle the parties had become accustomed to living.

This case highlights the fact that the appellate courts will scrutinize a chancellor's ruling to ensure they provide adequate justifications for their awards of alimony when the marital estate has been split and neither party is left with a deficit following that division of property.