Mississippi Family Law Blog

Constitutional showdown expected over Judge's ruling prohibiting father from taking daughter to church

An Illinois man going through a divorce was ordered by the Court not expose his daughter "to any other religion than the Jewish religion during his visitation." Seems Dad, who is Catholic, wanted to test this order and took his three-year-old daughter to Holy Name Cathedral. Another judge will now rule on whether he should be held in contempt for violating the court's order.

However, a Motion to Dismiss filed by the father's attorney argues that the Order is vague as it fails to define what encompasses the "Jewish religion". The law is clear that in order to be held in contempt, it must be clear what they were prohibited from doing. More importantly, the motion argues that the Court is unable to make the determination as to what constitutes "Jewish religion" as a result of the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine. Essentially, this doctrine prohibits a court from examining matters of religious doctrine as they are protected from government interference by the First Amendment to U.S. Constitution. Thus, the Court cannot say what is or is not the Jewish religion. And if it cannot determine what is the Jewish religion, then it cannot determine whether the father violated the court order.

I imagine the Court's ruling will not be the last we hear of this case. The story was previously on the news. See the video below.

Reported by Robert Kisselburgh, Mississippi Divorce Attorney

Billboard photos could cause problems in divorce

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. Usually that statement is in the context of a wife scorned by her husband. However, over the last week, billboards appeared in New York, San Francisco, Atlanta, and other cities showing a romantic photograph of the co-president of Oracle, Charles E. Phillips, Jr., with a woman. The woman was not his wife, but his ex-mistress. Mr. Phillips came out on Thursday to say the woman on the billboards, YaVaughnie Wilkins, was his mistress of 8 1/2 years, who he has since ended a relationship with.

The first thought is Mrs. Phillips spent some money to embarrass and get back at her husband. Well, in this case, the scorned lover was the ex-mistress, according to the New York Times, who paid to have the billboards placed in an attempt to embarrass Mr. Phillips and no doubt cause him problems with his current divorce proceedings. Seems Mr. Phillips has another girlfriend and Ms. Wilkins was not happy about being sent packing. Ouch.

I think the divorce settlement discussions just heated up with Mr. and Mrs. Phillips.

Reported by: Robert Kisselburgh, Mississippi Divorce Lawyer

Court to decide sanctions over claims Barr lied under oath and destroyed evidence

In a follow-up to an earlier post, famous mystery writer Nevada Barr was back in a Hinds County Chancery courtroom today to face possible sanctions for lying under oath and destruction of evidence in her previous divorce case. According to the Clarion-Ledger, Barr admits she lied about her affair during her deposition. However, she also admitted she destroyed her computer when the other side sought its production.

This is serious stuff and the call for whether she should be sanctioned came from the Mississippi Supreme Court in its decision on Barr's case. Then presiding Justice Oliver Diaz wrote:

"When faced with such egregious misconduct, courts are obligated to consider sanctions that are severe enough to deter others from pursuing similar courses of action. The chancellor in this case did not satisfy that obligation and abused his discretion by not addressing Nevada's misconduct."

Chancery Judge Dewayne Thomas will decide Barr's fate.

Source: Clarion-Ledger

Reported by Robert Kisselburgh, Mississippi Divorce Attorney

New law authorizes casinos to collect child support from winners

Colorado enacted a new law that requires casinos to do a computer check of any person winning more than $1,200. If they are delinquent, the money goes to the state as opposed to the unhappy gambler. It is about time! Colorado, according to the article, collected over $320 million last year in back child support through this new law. Hopefully, Mississippi will enact a similar law.

Information provided by: Robert Kisselburgh, Mississippi Divorce Attorney

Is free paternity testing the answer to the problem in Mississippi?

Mississippi Department of Human Services is offering free paternity testing in hopes of identifying parents who are not paying child support for their children. Federal funding is paying for the program. According to the article, the director of Child Support Enforcement said, "After paternity is established, the next thing we are going to go after is financial support on a monthly basis and medical support." State officials estimate there is "as much as $25 million in uncollected child support because paternity has not been established."

While it sounds like a great effort, the question must be asked: If officials are hoping for individuals to voluntarily participate, how successful will this program be? If a person really believes they are the parent of a child, why haven't they had paternity testing done to determine whether they are the biological parent. Paternity testing is not that expensive. If they can't afford the testing, then what makes government officials think they will be able to collect child support from them. OR, if they can afford to pay child support, why haven't they had the paternity testing done before now and why would they voluntarily participate in the program?

If the program is being used to pay for paternity testing after a court has ordered it, then this will be a temporary relief to Mississippi taxpayers. But hoping individuals will voluntarily participate is probably wishful thinking. While I strongly support identifying biological parents and ensuring they pay for their children, I question whether this was the best use of federal funds. Remember, state or federal funding is still taxpayers' money.

Reported by Robert Kisselburgh of the Kisselburgh Law Firm

Tennessee law firm sued for using e-mails obtained using spyware

A lawsuit was filed against a Tennessee law firm for $2,000,000 dollars for its alleged use of e-mails in a divorce action. According to the article, the lawsuit claims the ex-wife loaded spyware on her then husband's computer and intercepted e-mails. The e-mails eventually were given to the law firm representing the ex-wife in the divorce and once her husband found out, he sued the law firm for violations of federal and state law.

Let me make a point--just because the software is available for sale does not mean its use is legal. Many times software is sold for one purpose--parents keeping track of their children's activities on a computer--and then is used for another, possibly, illegal activity--spying on someone. When spouses are going through a divorce and one spouse uses that software to intercept e-mails sent by the other spouse to third parties, it usually means you may be violating federal law. Federal and state laws govern the interception of electronic communications and you can find yourself in hot water if you use the software in an illegal manner.

See my previous posts, here and here, on the issue and make sure you consult an attorney before you act. Not only can you face both civil and criminal penalties for illegally intercepting electronic communications, but others who use the data gathered can also face penalties.

At the Kisselburgh Law Firm, we have experience representing clients going through a divorce. Call us at 601-936-4040 or contact us online to set up a consultation if you are contemplating a divorce.

Mississippi court holds joint physical custody does not mean equally divided custody

In Mississippi, the Court usually awards one parent physical custody while granting liberal visitation to the other. However, in some cases, courts can award the parties joint physical custody. Many parents believe that means custody on an equally divided basis. That is not necessarily true. Mississippi Code §93-5-24(5)(c) provides that "joint physical custody' means that each of the parents shall have significant periods of physical custody." What does that mean?

In a recent case out of DeSoto County, MIssissippi, the Court Appeals upheld a chancellor's ruling giving the mother more physical custody than the father despite awarding the parties joint physical custody. In this case, the mother was awarded physical custody during the child's time in school and the father was given all spring breaks as well as the summer except for two weeks. Alternating weekends, Thanksgiving Day, and the Christmas holiday were equally divided. The Court found that the chancellor's decision was not an abuse of discretion--the standard required to reverse the ruling. The Court noted that the statute did not require an equal amount of time and the father was granted a significant period of visitation. Finally, the Court noted that the child's grades suffered when the child was "shuffled" between parents during the school week.

If you are contemplating a divorce or involved in a custody dispute, you should consult with a lawyer to ensure you fully understand the terms used in any marital dissolution agreement or custody arrangement. At the Kisselburgh Law Firm, we can discuss these matters with you to ensure your rights are protected. Call us at 601-936-4040 or contact us online to set up a consultation.

Unanimous U.S. Supreme Court holds ex-wife entitled to pension benefits

In a follow-up to a previous post concerning a dispute between an ex-wife and her daughter over the ex-husband's pension benefits, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion upholding the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision giving the benefits to the ex-wife. However, the U.S. Supreme Court disagreed with the Fifth Circuit reasoning and affirmed the ruling on other grounds.

To recap the facts, Mr. Kennedy was an employee of DuPont and participated in their savings and investment plan (SIP) that was an ERISA benefit plan. In 1971, Mr. Kennedy married and three years later signed a beneficiary designation identifying his new wife, Liv Kennedy, as the sole beneficiary of the SIP plan. Twenty years later, the couple divorced. As part of the divorce, the ex-wife agreed to relinquish all rights to husband’s pension benefits with DuPont. The agreement to waive those benefit was contained in the divorce decree. However, a Qualified Domestic Relations Order was not submitted covering these benefits nor did the husband ever change the beneficiary designation for the account.

In 1998, Mr. Kennedy retired from DuPont and later died in 2001. His daughter was appointed administrator of his estate. She sent a letter to DuPont requesting the Estate be paid the funds in the SIP. DuPont refused, stating that the beneficiary designation identified the ex-wife as the beneficiary. She also asked the ex-wife (her Mom) to relinquish her rights to the account and she refused. In fact, ex-wife asked DuPont to pay up and they sent the ex-wife the $400,000.00. Daughter, on behalf of the Estate, brought a lawsuit.

Continue reading "U.S. Supreme Court says ex-wife gets pension benefits" »

New alternative to jailing those delinquent in child support

In Washington D.C., a new program has emerged for those parents behind in child support payments who are without a job. The key is that they want to pay, but do not have the means. The new approach is Fathering Court. According to the article, it is an effort to put fathers on the right track to paying for their children and "emphasizes employment, starting with the basics."

While jail is still a remedy for those who just don't want to pay child support, this new approach is something Mississippi should explore. In many cases, especially during hard economic times, the non-custodial parent is without work and cannot pay. Jail provides no opportunity for that person to find a job. This program could be the answer.

Restraining order issued against threatening boyfriend

Here is one from a kid who has a lot to learn.

• Boyfriend has child with girlfriend;
• Boyfriend lives in North Carolina;
• Girlfriend and child live in Connecticut;
• Boyfriend makes video on YouTube;
• Video shows him waving gun and making threats against girlfriend;
• Girlfriend seeks restraining order based on online threats;
• Connecticut court grants restraining order.

The boyfriend is lucky he was not prosecuted in North Carolina for the threats.

Lessons learned: First, don't make threats to others, especially while waving a gun. It is a crime in most states. Second, don't videotape the threat and post on YouTube for everyone to see.

New Orleans man kills son rather than pay child support

The Clarion-Ledger reported today that a New Orleans man killed his two-year-old son after he was ordered to pay $4,000.00 in back child support. The man had earlier threatened to kill his children and ex-wife. He is now facing first-degree murder charges.

Why? What was he thinking? How could a father take the life of his own? Little sense is made of the story other than the fact that threatened violence in family disputes should be taken seriously. If you or your children have been threatened by a family member, seek help. In Mississippi, contact the Mississippi Coalition against Domestic Violence or contact your local police department.

Mississippi Supreme Court says child support payment not automatically reduced when one child is emancipated

For parents paying child support for two or more children, you may want to review your divorce decree to see if the decree addresses what happens to the child support payment when the oldest child is emancipated. If your decree does not specify how the child support will be reduced, then you might be headed back to court to seek a reduction.

Here is an example: A Madison, Mississippi couple divorce and have two children--18 and 14 years old. Husband agrees to pay $2,000 a month in child support, but nothing is said in the decree as to the amount of child support when the oldest child is emancipated. [If you have a question regarding when a child is emancipated in Mississippi, click here for my previous post on this subject]. The question is when the oldest child is emancipated, does the husband continue to pay $2,000.00 a month in child support even though there is only one child due support or is the amount of child support reduced? Well, if it is not spelled out in the divorce decree, then you will have to go back to Court to seek a modification or get the Court to approve an agreement between you and your ex-spouse.

Continue reading "Father can't reduce child support payments on his own" »

Judge to Husband--check or jail!

An man upset with the judge's ruling awarding his ex-wife $5,000 in lump sum alimony decided to seek some revenge. He delivered the $5,000 in a barrel containing 500,000 pennies. The ex-wife was not amused nor was the judge. Judge's order--"Pay by cashier's check or go to jail."

The Shark pays a hefty sum for divorce

According to recently released documents, famed golfer Greg Norman paid $103 million to his former wife to end their marriage. The recent article says the divorce settlement was reached in 2007 but the details were just made public. Norman recently wed ex-tennis star Chris Evert. Let's hope he had a good prenuptial agreement this time.

Wife granted annulment when husband turned out to be a woman

Here is an story that will leave you with more questions than answers. A man and wife (or so they thought) were married for seven years before getting divorced. Then the wife looked through an old high school yearbook and discovered that her "ex-husband" was a woman in high school. The woman went back to court and was granted an annulment of the marriage. The question remains--how were they married seven years without the wife figuring out her partner was not a man? Especially since the "ex-husband" was still physically a female?

Mississippi clerk pleads guilty to embezzlement of Child Support funds

In an update to a previous blog entry, a child support clerk from Meridian, Mississippi pled guilty to embezzling funds from the Lauderdale and Clarke County Child Support Program. The clerk embezzled $216,000 from the Bank Plan which collected child support payments from noncustodial parents and transferred it to custodial parents. The clerk was sentenced to 8 years in prison. She will serve 4 years in prison followed by 4 years of probation.

New Year brings with it increase in divorce filings

Here is an interesting article which says that the New Year is a time when many couples will make the decision about whether to divorce. The decision to divorce is usually put off during the holidays but resurfaces with the passage of a New Year. If you are contemplating a divorce, make sure you have done your homework. Talk with an attorney to understand your options, read the many articles on preparing for a divorce, including the ones I've posted on this site, and if you are still undecided, seek professional help from a marriage counselor.

Mississippi testing electronic filing system for state courts

The Madison County Journal recently reported that the Madison County, Mississippi Chancery Clerk and Circuit Clerk were authorized by the Mississippi Supreme Court to test an electronic filing system similar to one currently used in Mississippi Federal Courts. The testing of the program will be over a four month period.

Chancery Clerk Arthur Johnston was quoted as saying the system might not be practical for state courts. However, having used the system myself in Federal Courts and in other state courts, I can tell you there is no reason we should not be implementing it here in Mississippi. It benefits clients, attorneys, and court personnel. I’m holding out hope Mississippi will implement the system statewide and join a majority of jurisdictions where electronic filing systems are the norm and working quite well.

Clerk to have her day in court

According to the news out of Meridian, Mississippi, Cindy Truhett, the child support clerk accused of embezzling funds from the Lauderdale and Clarke County Child Support Program, is scheduled to go to trial on November 27th in the Lauderdale County Circuit Court. Cindy Truhett is accused of writing unauthorized checks to herself over a five year period totaling more than $216,000.00.

Natchez home to tamales and margaritas gets new abode

A little off the beaten path from family law, but important news nonetheless and great news for those lovers of tamales and margaritas at the infamous Fat Mama’s in Natchez, Mississippi. The Mississippi Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the City of Natchez and Fat Mama’s to relocate Fat Mama’s from its current historic location to the corner of Canal and Washington.

The dispute arose when the United States Department of Interior designated land as a national park. The land included Fat Mama’s present location. So Fat Mama’s had to move. The city approved the new location, but some homeowners filed a lawsuit protesting its relocation and rezoning of the area. In an opinion issued this last Tuesday, the Mississippi Court of Appeals upheld the City of Natchez’s decision to approve the rezoning.

So for those of us who travel to Natchez (if you have not been, you are missing an experience), rest assured that Fat Mama’s will continue serving those tamales and margaritas and soon will be sporting a new location—hopefully one with a little more parking.