Harrison v. Howard

• Decision Date: 07 February 2023
• Docket Number: 2021-CA-00697-COA
• Parties: MICHAEL EUGENE HARRISON APPELLANT v. HEATHER HOWARD APPELLEE
• Court: Mississippi Court of Appeals

MICHAEL EUGENE HARRISON APPELLANT v. HEATHER HOWARD APPELLEE

No. 2021-CA-00697-COA

Court of Appeals of Mississippi

February 7, 2023

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/25/2021

MADISON COUNTY CHANCERY COURT HON. ROBERT GEORGE CLARK III TRIAL JUDGE

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: MATTHEW THOMPSON CHAD KENNETH KING

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: JEFFREY BIRL RIMES

BEFORE WILSON, P.J., WESTBROOKS AND EMFINGER, JJ.

WESTBROOKS, J.

¶1. Michael Harrison appeals from the chancery court's judgment holding him in contempt for his failure to abide by an agreed order of modification of child custody and support entered on March 9, 2018. After thoroughly reviewing the record, we affirm the chancery court's ruling.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶2. Michael and Heather married on October 10, 1998, in Hinds County, Mississippi. Fraternal twins (one boy and one girl) were born of this marriage in 2001. In March 2009, Heather reconnected with Jason Howard, a man from her past, through social media. The newly established relationship resulted in Michael and Heather's divorce because Heather began a physical and sexual relationship with Jason in September 2009. Once Michael discovered Heather's adultery, Heather abruptly decided to move out of the marital home. She found a residence of her own and then allowed Jason to live with her there.

I. Divorce Proceedings

¶3. On November 12, 2009, Michael filed a complaint for divorce on the ground of uncondoned adultery and served Heather with a summons on the same day. Michael claimed that since the start of her affair, Heather had no longer been an attentive mother because she focused all her attention on Jason. Michael requested that their minor children be placed in his custody, with Heather paying him child support, and an equitable division of the marital property. Heather answered and counterclaimed, requesting child custody, child support, alimony, equitable division of marital assets, and attorney's fees. Depositions were taken, and a divorce hearing was held on January 18, 2012.

¶4. On May 17, 2012, the chancery court entered the "Final Judgment of Divorce" which contained some of the following stipulated provisions: a. Heather's share of Highland Building Services shall be two Thousand, Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500.00). Heather shall have no other interest in said business henceforth and forever more. b. Heather shall be entitled to Three [Thousand], Three Hundred and Eighty Dollars ($3,380.00) as her portion of the equity in the marital home [and] be paid at the time of closing on the sale of said property. c. Michael shall make reasonable diligent efforts to refinance said marital home and remove Heather's name from the mortgage. Michael shall make inquiries to three different lenders within sixty (60) days following the entry of the Final Judgment of Divorce, followed by one per year from that initial inquiry date for the following three (3) years, for a total of four (4) inquiries made in three (3) and two months.

Michael will provide reasonable proof of said refinance efforts. d. Should Michael be unable to refinance said home after the initial year after the entry of the Final Judgment of Divorce, interest shall accrue in favor of Heather at the amount of 8% on the $3,380 which is her interest in the marital home. e. Should Michael not make a mortgage payment within (30) days of it being due, so that his and/or Heather's credit reflect said nonpayment, this trigger[s] placing the home on the market with a reputable real estate [agent]/broker to be sold at fair market value. .... g. Michael shall be entitled to use, possession, and control of the marital home and shall be responsible for the mortgage, insurance, taxes, and upkeep of same. Upon closing on the marital home, Michael shall be entitled to exclusive ownership of the home, and Heather shall quitclaim same to Michael at the time she is released from the mortgage.

¶5. The Final Judgment of Divorce granted Michael sole physical custody of the twins, with Heather having visitation rights. The chancery court also ordered that Heather pay twenty percent of her monthly adjusted gross income, totaling $866, to Michael for child support. The chancery court provided that Michael shall have exclusive use, possession, and ownership of the marital home and be "solely responsible for the mortgage, taxes, and insurance." Both parties were to continue to hold a $400,000.00 life insurance policy that named the children as beneficiaries.

¶6. On August 31, 2012, Heather and Michael submitted the below "Stipulation and Partial Property Settlement Agreement" (Property Settlement Agreement) for the court to amend the Final Judgment of Divorce by adding these terms:^[1]

The parties agree that Mike has an agreement with Chase Mortgage, and Mike shall continue to pay timely his present amount with Chase Mortgage through the month of November 2012, when the agreement shall be satisfied, and the stipulations incorporated in the Final Judgment of Divorce shall continue to govern [Mike's mortgage payments]....

That the parties further agree that the correct child support amount . . . should be reduced to $693.00 per month. The parties agree that the coverage in payments for the months of June, July, and August, 2012, shall be credited back to Heather, so that for the month of September 2012, Heather's child support payment shall be $174, which shall be paid on September 1, 2012. Beginning October, 2012, and for each month thereafter, Heather's child support payment shall be $693 per month.

That Mike owes unto Heather the amount of $2,500 for her share of Mike's business, and that parties request this Honorable Court to determine the time in which said amount must be paid to Heather by Mike....

The parties further stipulate and agree that Heather owes taxes per the Final Judgment of Divorce, and the [Plaintiff] request[s] this Honorable Court to provide the timeline for Heather's payment of same.

According to the terms of the Property Settlement Agreement, Michael owed Heather (1) $3,380 for the equity of the marital home and if he does not sell the home an annual interest of eight percent and (2) $2,500 for the share of the business. On September 4, 2013, the chancery court granted Michael's motion to amend and added the above provisions to the Final Judgment of Divorce. Neither party contested the court's additions.

II. Modification Proceedings A. Motion for Modification

¶7. Two-and-a-half weeks later, Heather moved for modification of the Property Settlement Agreement (which included the terms of the original Final Judgment of Divorce). In October 2013, the chancellor set a modification hearing for April 16, 2014. On June 9, 2014, Michael's counsel entered a notice of appearance on his behalf. But after years without any activity in the case, the court clerk entered a motion to dismiss the case for lack of prosecution. On December 9, 2015, the chancery court dismissed the case without prejudice.

B. Complaint for Contempt and Petition for Modification of Custody and Other Relief

¶8. On December 15, 2016, Heather filed a combined complaint for contempt and petition for modification of the Property Settlement Agreement against Michael. A new chancery judge set a hearing for April 12, 2017, and a Rule 81 summons was issued to Michael, notifying him of the April hearing. M.R.C.P. 81. On April 7, 2017, Michael, representing himself, filed an answer to Heather's complaint while also counterclaiming against Heather for her failure to pay child support since 2014 in accordance with the Property Settlement Agreement. Days later, Heather moved to continue the hearing. The hearing was held on November 8, 2017, and both Michael and Heather were present. Michael appeared before the chancery court without an attorney. During the hearing, Michael and Heather submitted a memorandum to the chancery court. The memorandum was an agreement between Michael and Heather modifying the Property Settlement Agreement and the following exchange occurred:

COURT: Prior to coming into court, the Court conferred with counsel for Ms. Howard and Mr. Harrison, who is acting pro se. From what I understand, the parties have reached an agreement as to all of the matter presently before the Court.

PRIESTER: Yes, your Honor.

COURT: And, in fact, that agreement has been reduced to a memorandum.

COURT: That has been executed by both parties.

PRIESTER: Yes, your Honor.

COURT: And we went over that in chambers and from what I understand, Mr. Harrison, this is an agreement that you have made with Ms. Howard regarding the resolution of both your petition - because you filed a counter-petition.

MICHAEL: Correct.

COURT: But it resolves all issues presently before the Court?

MICHAEL: Yes, your Honor.

COURT: And this is your agreement?

MICHAEL: Yes, your Honor.

COURT: And you have gone through it, you understand it, and you come to that resolution with your ex-wife and counsel?

MICHAEL: Yes, sir.

COURT: All right. Ms. Howard, you have gone through this with your counsel regarding the terms as you have agreed to resolve all matters before the Court? HEATHER: Yes, sir.

COURT: And this is your agreement?

HEATHER: Yes, sir.

COURT: Both of you understand that this will be reduced to a court order, which will be presented to the Court and entered as the order of this Court. Do you understand that?

HEATHER: Yes, sir.

MICHAEL: Yes, sir.

COURT: For purposes of the record, the Court will admit as Exhibit 1 to this matter on today the agreed - - the agreement of the parties that have actually been executed by both of the parties.

¶9. Michael and Heather each stated at the hearing that all issues were resolved. Michael and Heather both signed the memorandum and dated their signatures as "11/8/17"-the same day as the...