Mississippi Family Law Blog

Divided Mississippi Court of Appeals upholds equitable division of property in void marriage

In my last post, I spoke about the Chancery Court annulling a 37-year marriage because the wife failed to divorce her first husband when she married her second husband. But the question remained, why did the current husband, after 37 years of marriage, not agree to a divorce rather than fight for an annulment. The answer was money. If the husband agreed to a divorce, then the marital estate would be divided on an equitable basis. However, if there was no valid marriage in the first place, the husband could argue the wife was not entitled to an equitable division of the property. That is what he did.

Mississippi law, according to the husband, required a party to a void marriage to have entered into that marriage in good faith before the chancellor could award any form of equitable relief. His position was the wife did not enter into this marriage in good faith given she knew she was not divorced from her first husband at the time of the marriage. However, the Chancellor, nor the Court of Appeals, was swayed by this argument. It held that “good faith is not required under Mississippi law to support an equitable distribution of property acquired during a void marriage.” The Court said, “where parties live together without benefit of marriage and where, through their joint efforts, accumulate real property or personal property, or both, a party having no legal title nevertheless acquires rights to an equitable share enforceable at law…. Such a remedy is only available where ‘the couples had … either been married or contended to have married.’”

Continue reading "Void marriage--Who gets the property in Mississippi?" »

37 year "marriage" annulled in Mississippi

After 37 years of marriage and rearing four children, the wife files for divorce. Husband responds with a claim of annulment, saying he and his wife were never legally married given she failed to divorce her first husband. Sound crazy. Well, it happened in a Desoto County Chancery Court and the Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down its decision in this case this week.

In Cotton v. Cotton, the Mississippi Court of Appeals affirmed a decision concerning property division in an annulled marriage. The Chancellor granted the annulment because the wife was never legally divorced from her first husband, who she married at 16, and therefore her marriage to her current spouse, at age 23, was void. Despite the fact that the couple had lived as husband and wife for 37 years and raised four children, their marriage legally never occurred. Harsh? Not really.

In Mississippi, the Mississippi Code Sec. 93-7-1 states that a person may obtain an annulment of the marriage, as opposed to divorce, if the following causes existed on the date of the marriage:

1. Incurable impotency;
2. Insanity;
3. Failure to meet licensure requirements, if there has been no cohabitation;
4. Incapacity to consent due to age or lack of understanding;
5. Physical incapacity to enter into the marriage state;
6. Consent obtained by force or fraud; or
7. The wife was pregnant by another on the date of the marriage without husband's knowledge.

For grounds 4 through 7, the suit for annulment must be brought within six months of the time the ground is or should have been discovered. For ground 2 above, the suit must be brought within six months from the date of the marriage.

However, bigamous or incestuous marriages are void marriages and may be annulled at any time. This is how after 37 years of marriage, Mr. Cotton was able to obtain an annulment given Ms. Cotton had not divorced her previous husband at the time she married Mr. Cotton.

Why, after 37 years of marriage, would the husband ask for an annulment as opposed to agreeing to a divorce? Well, the answer appears to be money. The husband argued that given there never was a marriage, the couple's property should not be equitably divided as is required in the case of married couple's divorcing. The Court did not rule on the issue of the annulment as the wife failed to raise the issue in cross-appeal. The husband only appealed the court's division of the property. In my next post, I will discuss the court's ruling concerning the division of the property in a void marriage.

Mississippi attorney Robert Kisselburgh represents clients in divorces throughout the state of Mississippi. If you have questions or would like to discuss your case, contact us at 877-601-4040, 601-936-4040, or contact us online.

New York Times advice on divorce

In a recent series, the New York Times ran some articles offering financial and practical advice for those going through or contemplating a divorce. Here are the articles:

Financial Decisions to Make as You Divorce
Experienced in Love and Money.

Lamar County divorce case partially remanded back to Chancellor for third look

Sometimes a case just never ends. That has to be the feeling for a divorce case out of Lamar County, Mississippi. Last week, the Mississippi Supreme Court sent the case back to the Chancellor for a third trial. In Lowrey v. Lowrey, the original final judgment of divorce was signed in September 2002. The wife appealed that initial decision. In 2005, the Mississippi Court of Appeals affirmed the divorce, but reversed and remanded the case for the Chancellor to decide "unresolved matters of child custody, child support, property division and alimony." A second trial was held by a different Chancellor from the first case. And to add to the problem, the case was heard on different dates (2006 and 2007), a common occurrence in Chancery courts in Mississippi. Both parties appealed the final decision by the Chancellor.

The Mississippi Supreme Court recognized this "piecemeal" litigation, where the Chancellor will hold multiple hearings to decide the issues, is a problem with our Chancery Courts.

Hearings can be, and often are, separated by weeks or even months, as occurred in this proceeding. Chancellors are required to follow the testimony of witnesses, review documents offered as exhibits, and attempt to make contemporaneous notes. Trial judges are not afforded the advantage of appellate courts to review the full record of a case without interruption.

Continue reading "Mississippi Supreme Court sends case back to Chancellor for a third trial" »

Alimony award reversed in Mississippi divorce

The Mississippi Court of Appeals recently reversed an award of alimony in a divorce case from Neshoba County, Mississippi. In Sellers v. Sellers, the couple had a marital estate valued at $304,230. The wife had a non-marital estate valued at $13,620 while the husband had a non-marital estate of $137,500.

In dividing the marital estate, the chancellor awarded the wife $142,990. The husband was given possession of the marital home, but the chancellor ordered the husband to pay $50,000 in lump-sum alimony to the wife for her one-half equity in the marital home. After this award, the wife's award was valued at $192,990 while the husband got $111,240. Following that award, the chancellor then ordered the husband to pay the wife $12,600 in periodic alimony. The husband appealed.

Continue reading "Periodic alimony award reversed by Mississippi Court of Appeals" »

Can I collect Social Security benefits using my ex-spouse's employment history?

Typical scenario: Husband and wife have been married for twenty years and they get divorced. For the majority of their married life, husband was the bread winner in the family while the wife was a stay-at-home mom. Following the divorce, the wife goes back to work but never makes what her husband. When it comes to retirement, the question is whether the wife can collect social security benefits using her employment record or can she seek social security benefits using her ex-husband's employment record.

In an article today on ABC news, the author said the general rule is:

In addition to the required 10 years of marriage, there are four key qualifications to collect divorced spouse benefits:

The person seeking to collect must not have remarried.

This person must be 62 or older.

The benefit this person would collect based on his or her own earnings record must be smaller than what they would collect on their former spouse's earnings history.

And the ex-spouse must be entitled to Social Security retirement or disability benefits on their own.

Another rule is that if you remarry, you generally cannot collect your ex-spouse's benefits unless the current marriage ends in death, divorce, or an annulment. The Social Security Administration also has some good information on their website.

If you or a loved one are contemplating divorce, you should speak with an experienced attorney. At the Kisselburgh Law Firm, we are experienced in representing clients going through a divorce. Call us at 601-936-4040 or contact us online to set up a consultation.

Liability for marital debts when you divorce in Mississippi

In a recent Los Angeles Times article, the author gave some good tips to couples dividing debts during a divorce. The overriding concern and point that should be reiterated is that just because you and your spouse agree that one of you will be responsible for a debt, it does not change the relationship with your creditor. Here is an example.

A Madison County, Mississippi couple are divorcing and have joint credit cards with American Express and Visa. The husband agrees to take on the American Express payments while the wife agrees to pay the Visa bill. After the divorce, things don't go well for the husband and he defaults on his payments to American Express. American Express goes after the wife for payment. She says how can that be? Well, if she was a joint account holder on the card at the time the debt was accumulated, then she is jointly liable for those debts. She probably has an agreement from her husband to indemnify her (standard in a divorce), but that indemnification agreement means nothing to the creditor. American Express must be paid and the wife will be jointly responsible. While she can then go after the husband for the money, if he does not have it, the indemnification agreement does not do her much good.

Lessons learned?

1. When divorcing, you need to ensure that you are aware of all debt accumulated during your marriage.

2. If you have joint credit cards, cancel the joint cards.

3. If there are balances on those cards, make sure one spouse opens up an account to transfer the balance to so it is no longer a joint debt or pays off the debt.

4. As for other jointly-held debt, such as mortgages and automobiles, you need to refinance the debt if possible. Those lenders will enforce their original agreement where both of you agreed to pay the debt even if your divorce decree says one spouse is responsible for payment.

I spoke about this issue before in a previous post. If you find yourself contemplating a divorce, call the Kisselburgh Law Firm at 601-936-4040 or contact us online to set up a consultation to discuss your rights.

Understand a divorce property settlement agreement before you sign it

This week the Mississippi Court of Appeals sided with a Madison County Chancellor who ruled a husband was responsible for paying a balloon payment on the divorced couple's mortgage. The case highlights the importance of being represented by an attorney when divorcing and also making sure you understand the documents you sign.

When the couple divorced, the husband agreed to pay alimony in the amount of the monthly mortgage payments "until such time as the mortgage on the property ... is fully satisfied." To ensure payments, he also agreed to provide a life insurance policy in the amount of $150,000. The tricky part was the mortgage contained a balloon clause. At the end of the mortgage term, a final payment of $142,268.41 payment was due. When it came due, the husband claimed he did not owe it.

A hearing was held and the Chancellor ruled in favor of the wife. The husband appealed. The Mississippi Court of Appeals sided with the chancellor. The question came down to whether the dissolution agreement was ambiguous or not. In Mississippi, as in many other states, a divorce property settlement agreement is a contract between the parties. The Court will look to the document for its intent unless the contract is ambiguous. In this case, the Court found that although one provision was ambiguous, the agreement provided the husband would pay the mortgage until it was "fully satisfied." The mortgage could not be "fully satisfied" unless the final balloon payment was made. Further, by the husband agreeing to provide a life insurance policy for the value of the house, it showed his intent to be obligated for the full amount of the mortgage. As the Court of Appeals stated, "it would be nonsensical for [the husband] to voluntarily obligate himself to obtain life insurance for the full amount due under the mortgage if he were not intending to obligate himself for this amount."

Let me repeat an important lesson. The wife was represented by an attorney who drafted the dissolution agreement, but the husband represented himself in the divorce. Too many times I receive calls from folks who did not have representation at the time of their divorce and are now calling to say there did not realize they were obligated to do certain things. At the Kisselburgh Law Firm, we represent those going through divorces. If you are contemplating a divorce, call us at 601-936-4040 or contact us online to set up a consultation to discuss your rights.

Economy drives down divorces as well as 401K

During these down economic times, people fear opening the mail to look at their 401K balances which are reaching new lows. But less people should fear finding divorce papers in the mail according to a recent article. It seems the economic downturn is also related to a downturn in divorces. And the cause is not more marital harmony, but less money--some people can't afford to get divorced.

When the two largest assets of a marriage, the home and the 401K, are down to new lows and many people are living in homes where they owe more than it is worth, how does an unhappy couple divide their assets. They don't. Rather, if they divide anything it will be debt. So some of these unhappy couples are deciding to live together as opposed to divorcing. Hopefully, we will not see an increase in domestic violence as unhappy couples live together.

If you find yourself in an unhappy relationship and are contemplating divorce, you need to get advice from an experienced divorce attorney. Call the Kisselburgh Law Firm at 601-936-4040 or contact us online to set up a consultation to discuss your case and the options you have or click here to get your free copy of the Mississippi Divorce Guide.

Home bought prior to marriage becomes marital property

The Mississippi Court of Appeals recently handed down a decision in a Copiah County, Mississippi divorce case. In this case, the husband lived in a home in the Hazlehurst, Mississippi area prior to marrying his wife. After they married, the couple lived in that house before selling it to buy a new home. They used the proceeds from the sale of the home to buy the new home. When the parties divorced, the husband argued the proceeds from the sale of the pre-marital home were not marital property as he owned it prior to marriage and it was purchased with pre-marital funds. The chancellor disagreed holding that the home was marital property given it was used by the family during his marriage. The Court of Appeals agreed.

The Court noted the well-settled rule that "non-marital assets may lose their characterization as such if the party commingles the asset with marital property or uses them for familial benefit." Even though the husband owned the first house prior to his marriage, "the property gained status as a marital assert upon its prolonged use as their family home." This concept is sometimes termed the "family use" doctrine.

The husband's second argument was that the wife did not contribute anything to the house given she stayed at home. Thus, she should not benefit from the increase in value of the home. Again, the Court disagreed. The wife stayed at home as a homemaker, raising the family, and going to school to further her education. All with the encouragement of her husband. As such, her role as homemaker and mother was sufficient to show a contribution to the equity of the home. "Any contributions or efforts by either party in the marriage, 'whether economic, domestic or otherwise, are of equal value."

This case provides a good analysis of the trying to divide property in a divorce, some of which was acquired prior to the parties' marriage. The Kisselburgh Law Firm represents individuals involved in divorces. If you are contemplating a divorce, contact us online or call us at 601-936-4040 to set up a consultation.

Downturn in housing market impacts divorce

The downturn in the housing market is impacting the ability of some to divorce. Quite frankly, they can not afford to divorce given they owe more on their home than it is worth. In an article out of California, the impact of the housing downturn is amplified. While housing prices were up, it was easier to split the couple's assets with the home usually being the largest asset. As one person quoted in the article said, "the hardest thing was picking a Realtor." But with the downturn in housing prices, it is more difficult. Even if one spouse wants to stay in the home, they must be able to afford the house payment as well as pay off the other spouse for their share of the equity (although that is diminishing as prices slide).

More troubling is when one spouse wants to sell and the other does not. This puts the courts in the position of deciding whether to order a sale or wait in hopes the real estate market will rebound. As the article points out, these economic times raise many issues when homeowners divorce.

Continue reading "Breaking up is harder to do" »

Dividing Retirement Benefits in a Mississippi divorce

Continuing on with my previous post on this subject, the second step for the chancellor in dividing retirement benefits in a Mississippi divorce is valuing the assets. How much are the retirement benefits worth? With a defined contribution plan, this is relatively easy as you know how much money is in the account at the valuation date or you should be able to get that information from the plan administrator. However, what if some of the benefits benefits (the employer's contribution) are not vested (that is, the employee is entitled to at the time) and are those benefits valued the same? A more difficult proposition is if the employee's retirement benefits are a defined benefit plan. In this case, it will require a formula to calculate the value of the benefits earned during the marriage. This calculation can be complex and can require the assistance of a professional.

The final step for the chancellor is how to divide the retirement benefits. This falls back to the analysis discussed in earlier post regarding the division of marital property in a Mississippi divorce.

A review of these posts regarding dividing retirement benefits in a Mississippi divorce should make it apparent that this is not a job people should attempt on their own. While you may be able to work out the basic framework for dividing the retirement benefits, you should seek the advice of a divorce attorney to protect yourself against a potential minefield.

If spouses are unable to agree on how to divide retirement benefits in a Mississippi divorce, then the job falls to the chancellor. Retirement benefits are no different than other property in a divorce. Essentially, there are three steps.

• Determine the character of the property;


• Determine the value of the property; and


• Determine how to divide the property.

Let's take each of these steps separately.

Continue reading "How the Mississippi judge divides the retirement nest egg" »

Guess Who’s Not Coming to Dinner

Continuing on in the discussion of the pitfalls of ERISA when dividing retirement benefits during a divorce in Mississippi, this next case illustrates the importance of complying with ERISA as well as changing the beneficiary forms following a divorce.

In Kennedy v. DuPont, 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. Although a QDRO was submitted and approved, the QDRO did not address the benefits in the husband’s SIP account nor did the husband ever change the beneficiary designation for the SIP account. It only addressed the other pension benefits Mr. Kennedy had at DuPont.

Continue reading "Divorce and Death—dividing the Nest Egg" »

Too many pieces of the financial pie

In a recent 2008 decision from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (which handles federal appeals out of Mississippi as well as Texas and Louisiana), the need for a properly drafted QDRO in a divorce was stressed. This case illustrates the problem of not complying with ERISA in drafting a QDRO. Seemingly, one attorney thought a court order was sufficient, while the Fifth Circuit reminded the attorney that ignoring the dictates of ERISA is at your own peril.

Taliaferro v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.involved a man married and divorced twice. The husband, who worked for Goodyear Tire & Rubber, divorced his first wife. The divorce decree required the husband to pay child support but he fell behind. In 2001, his first ex-wife took him to court to collect the child support arrearages. The state district court granted the ex-wife a right to collect the child support from his retirement account at Goodyear. The attorney sent a notice to Goodyear claiming an interest in the retirement account. In response, Goodyear told the attorney he needed to provide a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) and supplied the attorney with the guidelines. (NOTE: QDROs can be used to collect child support.) However, the attorney never provided Goodyear with a QDRO. Rather, Goodyear received two additional state court orders directing it to withhold child support payments from the husband’s retirement account. Each time, Goodyear told the parties a properly drafted QDRO was required and each time this request was ignored.

Continue reading "Competing claims for retirement benefits" »

Dividing Pension Plans in a Mississippi Divorce

Two major concerns arise when dividing pension plans benefits governed by ERISA. First is whether the pension plan administrator will follow the directives of the divorcing spouses. The second is how can the transfers take place without the recipient spouse being taxed by the IRS for an early withdrawal.

Assuming the husband's retirement account (using our previous example) is controlled by ERISA (which controls most private employer accounts), the retirement plan administrator will require a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) before he will divide the benefits. ERISA prohibits state laws from interfering with ERISA plans. An exception created by Congress is the QDRO. A QDRO is a judgment, decree, or order issued by a state court which:

Continue reading "Dividing the Nest Egg in Divorce" »

The Nest Egg and Divorce in Mississippi

Here is a common situation I see as a Mississippi divorce lawyer. A wife wants to divorce her husband. The husband works for a large employer in Madison, Mississippi and has accumulated a nice retirement account from the employer while married to his spouse. In fact, other than the house, the husband’s retirement account is the largest asset this couple owns. The wife wants to know if she is entitled to any of the retirement account. If so, can it be divided.

The answer to the first question depends on how the retirement account was earned. Generally, a retirement account that was accumulated during the marriage is marital property. The reasoning is that wages and benefits of employment earned during the marriage are marital property. That brings up the second question—how can the retirement account be divided?

Continue reading "Pension Plans and Divorce" »

How to divide the Retirement Nest Egg in a Mississippi Divorce

As a Mississippi divorce lawyer, it surprises me the number of people who overlook the implications of retirement benefits during a divorce. For most individuals, retirement benefits are usually their biggest asset outside of their home. In the next couple of posts, I will discuss some common issues seen with retirement benefits and divorce.

But the decree said he was responsible for that bill!

A common misconception among people going through divorce in Mississippi is the responsibility of paying debts following divorce. Here is a classic example: Husband and wife have two cars, both financed through their bank and both of their names are on the loans. During the divorce negotiations, the wife and husband agree to each keep the vehicle they drive and each agrees to pay for their own car. Following the divorce, the wife is very diligent in making timely car payments. Six months after the divorce, she goes to the bank for a loan and is denied because her credit score is too low. Upon checking, she finds that her credit score was lowered because her ex-husband was not making the payments on his car. How can this happen? Didn’t the divorce split the debts? Didn’t her husband agree to pay the debt? Not so fast. She is still financially responsible for the debt because her name is on the loan.

Continue reading "Your credit score following divorce" »

Property bought during a separation—who owns it?

As a Mississippi divorce attorney, I get a fair amount of questions concerning property ownership. An example is this one. If my husband and I separate and file for divorce, does my husband have a legal right to any property I buy after we separate but before the divorce is finalized?

Normally, all assets acquired during the marriage are presumed to be marital property. Given there is no such thing as a legal separation in Mississippi, any property acquired from the date of marriage until the date of divorce is presumed to be martial property. There is one exception. In Godwin v. Godwin, the Mississippi Supreme Court held that:

Continue reading "In a Mississippi, who owns property acquired during the pendency of the divorce?" »

Money can’t buy me love

The Beatles were right, at least according to a survey reported in Forbes. According to the article, a survey of those with a net worth of $1,000,000 or more found almost half of the respondents unhappy in their marriage. More surprising was the fact that 61% of the women surveyed and 43% of the men admitted to being unfaithful within the last 3 years. However, even though almost half were unhappy in their marriage, only 30% said they were contemplating divorce. The reason? According to three-quarters of the men, the fear as to how much money they would lose in a divorce. 51% of the women cited the number one reason for not divorcing was “interference with business dealings.”

The most telling aspect of the study was only about 6% of the respondents had a prenuptial agreement. A properly drafted prenuptial agreement may be able to protect your hard-earned assets in a divorce in Mississippi. If you are considering marriage in Mississippi, you should discuss the issue with your future spouse. While some are reluctant to bring up the issue feeling that it indicates they will divorce in the future, the fact is in today’s society, it is more than a possibility. A prenuptial agreement is an insurance policy. None of us plan on tragedy striking our lives, but we all plan for it everyday when we buy insurance. A prenuptial agreement is similar. Discuss the issue with your fiancé and discuss the matter with an experienced attorney.

Cover your financial bases

Here is an interesting article in the USA Today entitled "Breaking up is hard to do financially." It offers advice for the top 5 financial mistakes couples make when divorcing. For those divorcing in Mississippi, you should discuss this advice with your attorney to ensure you are protected financially.

Who is responsible for the debt?

Here is a common scenario. A husband and wife own a home in Madison, Mississippi. They finance $300,000 of the $350,000 purchase price with a lender. The mortgage is in both of their names. A year after they purchase the house, the husband wants a divorce. The husband moves out of the house in Madison and moves into a house in Brandon. As part of the divorce settlement, the divorce decree states that the wife will take possession of the home in Madison and is obligated to pay the mortgage. The husband thinks he is in the clear. However, the original note on the Madison home is not refinanced. About a year later, the wife quits making payments on the house in Madison and the mortgage goes into default. The result: The lender can sue both the wife and husband for the debt and probably will despite the fact that the divorce decree says that the wife is responsible for making the payments.

This is one of the financial scenarios of divorce discussed in a USA Today article yesterday. There is a common misunderstanding many have on who is responsible for the debt. In Mississippi, if that debt was incurred by both of you during your marriage (both of your names are on the mortgage or both of your names are on the credit card account), although the divorce decree may state one spouse is responsible for paying the debt, if that spouse quits paying, both spouses credit will be impacted and the holder of the note (bank or credit card company) can sue both for the debt. The divorce decree does not change the legal obligation you have to the lender. What can you do to ensure this does not happen?

Continue reading "Who is paying the mortgage?" »

Is this all I get?

Being a Mississippi divorce lawyer, I get questions about whether a spouse is entitled to alimony. The answer is it depends. After the equitable distribution of the marital estate (see previous post), the chancellor will look at the whole spectrum of property available to both spouses—the marital property divided as well as the non-marital property under each spouse’s control. If one party is left with a deficit, then the chancellor is to consider awarding alimony. In Mississippi, there are four different types of alimony—periodic, lump sum, rehabilitative, and reimbursement.

Continue reading "Property Division (Part III)—Alimony in Mississippi" »

Does equitable mean equal in Mississippi?

In a divorce, what is this “equitable distribution” scheme which Mississippi follows? In 1994, the Mississippi Supreme Court described it as:

The authority of the courts to award property legally owned by one spouse to the other spouse, and recognizes that a non-working spouse’s efforts contribute to the acquisition of the marital estate… Under the equitable distribution system, the marriage is viewed as a partnership with both spouses contributing to the marital estate in the manner which they have chosen.

Ferguson v. Ferguson, 639 So.2d 921 (Miss. 1994). Well, that is the justification for the system, but how does the chancellor divide the property?

Continue reading "Property Division (Part II)—What is “equitable distribution”?" »

Who decides who gets what property in a Mississippi divorce?

The easy answer is that if you and your spouse can agree, then each of you have a say in how your property will be divided. That is how it works in the perfect world. Yet, many times, spouses are unable or unwilling to agree on how to split their assets as one spouse usually thinks they are entitled to more property than the other. So what happens? The chancellor will decide and is guided by case law in Mississippi.

Property division in Mississippi divorces has evolved over the years. For many years, Mississippi followed the “title” theory of property division. Under this system, the person who held “title” to the property received the property in a divorce. So if a husband held title to all the family property, a wife staying at home raising the children and carrying for her husband could end up with little property at the time of divorce even though she participated in the accumulation of wealth. This system had obvious inequities.

Although Mississippi followed the title system for many years, it evolved over the last 20 years trying different methods to minimize those inequities such as using alimony to offset one spouse's disproportionate share of property. Finally, in 1994, the Mississippi Supreme Court lay to rest the “title” system by adopting the system of “equitable distribution.” Note that I said “equitable distribution,” not “equal distribution.” There is a difference.

In coming posts, I will discuss the “equitable distribution” system of property division in Mississippi divorces.

Software making decisions in a divorce?

Technology has now entered the divorce arena at a new level. A recent technology post reports on two Australian researchers who have developed software designed to assist couples in dividing their property in a divorce. However, the software designers admit it does not work well when it comes to issues surrounding the children. In those cases, they must still rely on a family law attorney or mediator to ensure the results are in the best interest of the children.

While the software takes a step in the right direction by attempting to get couples to assign differing levels of importance to property issues and de-emphasize the emotional aspects of property division, I suspect it will not be a commercial blockbuster. What it should remind divorcing couples is that a lot of time and money can be wasted in a divorce arguing over simple property matters. Exercising tips 5 through 7 in my previous post--7 Tips for a Better Divorce—will go a long way towards a less emotional and more satisfying process.