Lockhart v. Lockhart

• Decision Date: 09 September 2021
• Docket Number: NO. 2020-CA-00343-SCT,2020-CA-00343-SCT
• Citation: 324 So.3d 777
• Parties: Clifford Michael LOCKHART v. Stella Payton LOCKHART
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court

324 So.3d 777

Clifford Michael LOCKHART

v.Stella Payton LOCKHART

NO. 2020-CA-00343-SCT

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

September 9, 2021

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: CAROL ANN BUSTIN, Hattiesburg

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: STELLA PAYTON (PRO SE)

BEFORE KITCHENS, P.J., MAXWELL AND CHAMBERLIN, JJ.

CHAMBERLIN, JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT:

¶1. Michael Lockhart appeals the Chancery Court of Forrest County's Opinion and Final Judgment entered in July 2019 (the 2019 Order) purporting to clarify the court's previous 2018 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Final Judgment (the 2018 Order) equitably distributing property between Lockhart and his ex-wife, Stella Payton. Lockhart also appeals the chancery court's Order Denying Post Trial Motion entered in February 2020. In doing so, Lockhart asserts that the chancery court erred by modifying the court's property division ruling from its 2018 Order, by assigning values to property identified in the 2018 Order, in its determination of "proceeds" related to certain businesses owned by Lockhart, by finding Lockhart in contempt, by failing to penalize Payton's contempt and allowing Payton equitable relief, by failing to assign rental income to Lockhart for two marital rental properties, by failing to provide Lockhart a way to retrieve his personal property from the marital home and by denying Lockhart's motion to recuse. Since each of Lockhart's eight assignments of error either lack merit or are procedurally barred on appeal, we affirm the decision of the chancery court.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

I. The 2018 Order

¶2. In May 2018, following the 2017 divorce of Lockhart and Payton, the Chancery Court of Forrest County entered the 2018 Order setting forth the equitable distribution of property between Lockhart and Payton as follows:

The court determines based on Hemsley ,¹ and Ferguson ,² that the property shall be divided as follows:

The marital home, located at 128 Pinehills Drive shall be sold and the proceeds divided equally between the parties. [Payton] will be entitled to one-half (½) of the equity in the Gamble Street and Edwards Street properties. Likewise, [Lockhart] will be entitled to one-half (½) of the equity in the properties located on Dearborn, and Palmetto. The Property located at Willis Avenue shall be sold, with the proceeds to be divided equally.

[Payton] shall be entitled to one-half (½) of the proceeds earned by [Lockhart] through his business Lockhart Construction and Lockhart-Gray Development that was generated th[r]ough August of 2017. [Lockhart] shall also be entitled to one-half (½) of the proceeds generated through the efforts of [Payton] in her business, Making People Priority and the Chayil Woman th[r]ough August of 2017. Any future proceeds earned through the writings, products, or other ventures associated with Making People Priority shall be the exclusive ownership of [Payton]. [Lockhart] is awarded the exclusive ownership, use and possession of his interest in Annointed Word Ministries.

[Lockhart] will get the 2003 Corvette; 2003 Dodge SQ3; 2008 Chevrolet Van; 2003 Ram 350; the 4-wheeler; the Generac Generator; and the 4200 PSA Power Washer. He will also be entitled to retrieve all of his personal possessions from the marital home.

[Payton] will get the 2008 Dodge MGN 4W; 2003 Mercedes 320; 1999 Mercedes 320 DL; Honda Motorcycle; the Troybuilt Generator; and the 6-gallon Compressor.

¶3. Payton then filed her Motion for Reconsideration and/or Clarification, Alternatively Motion for Partition of Property and Notice of Hearing, asserting that the court in its 2018 Order failed to consider both Payton's emotional attachment to the marital home and Lockhart's alleged failure to make mortgage payments pursuant to court orders. Further, Payton asserted that the equitable distribution in the 2018 Order failed to define "proceeds" with respect to businesses owned by Lockhart and, therefore, requested that the court determine such amounts. Moreover, Payton requested that a "newly discovered contract that was signed by Lockhart Construction on August 9, 2018 for the sum of $285,000.00 be included in the Lockhart Construction proceeds," that she be awarded the marital home and that all other assets be equitably divided.

¶4. In the alternative, Payton requested partition of all marital real property under Mississippi Code Section 11-21-11 (Rev. 2019), arguing that a sale of the marital property would promote the parties’ interests. In response, Lockhart asserted that he too has an emotional attachment to the marital home and that no further determinations with regard to the equitable distributions beyond the percentage distributions in the 2018 Order were required. Noting that equitable distribution as required by law was made in the case and finding that no new or compelling evidence warranting a change to the 2018 Order was presented, the court denied Payton's motion in June 2018. Neither party appealed the 2018 Order.

II. Contempt Proceedings

¶5. In August 2018, Payton filed her Complaint for Citation of Contempt and Complaint for Permanent Order of Protection, requesting that Lockhart be held in contempt for willful failure to abide by the court's 2018 Order. Payton specifically alleged that Lockhart failed to make mortgage payments for the marital residence and entered the marital residence in violation of previous court orders. Further, Payton alleged that Lockhart harassed Payton and her son, harassed a contractor hired by Payton and changed the locks to the marital home. Finally, Payton alleged that Lockhart took items not awarded to him in the 2018 Order, failed to turn over items awarded to Payton, failed to remove a vehicle awarded to him and failed to place for sale real property in his possession.

¶6. In his answer, Lockhart asserted "unclean hands" as an affirmative defense, arguing that Payton should be estopped from obtaining the relief sought in her complaint for contempt. Further, in addition to moving to dismiss Payton's contempt complaint under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b), Lockhart argued that the temporary orders forming the basis for relief for portions of Payton's contempt complaint were superseded by the court's 2018 Order. Lockhart also asserted a counterclaim for contempt against Payton, citing her refusal to comply with the court's 2018 Order by refusing to cooperate with the sale of the marital residence, failure to relinquish rental income, threatening Lockhart and refusing Lockhart access to his real property. Lockhart therefore requested Payton's removal from the marital home and appointment of a special master.

¶7. Payton also filed her Motion for Emergency Ex Parte Order and Notice of Hearing in August 2018 requesting a temporary restraining order against Lockhart, citing Lockhart's multiple alleged unauthorized entries to the marital home. In its Emergency Temporary Restraining Order, the court found that Lockhart did enter the marital home since the 2018 Order on two separate occasions and ordered continued sole and exclusive use and possession of the marital home and rental properties located on Palmetto Street and Dearborn Street to Payton. The court also ordered that Lockhart not enter any of the three premises, prevented Payton and Lockhart from contacting each other except through their attorneys and prohibited Payton and Lockhart from going within one hundred yards of each other.

III. Report of the Special Master

¶8. In October 2018, the court appointed Steve Headrick to serve as special master with directions to investigate, locate and take custody of assets listed in the 2018 Order, inspect the marital home, make a recommendation on equitable division of the assets and employ a realtor to carry out the 2018 Order. The court also extended the provisions of the temporary restraining order indefinitely and ordered Payton's continued use and possession of the marital home and Palmetto Street and Dearborn Street rental properties, but the court did allow Lockhart access to the marital home and the properties at Palmetto Street and Dearborn Street as arranged by Headrick. Finally, the court restrained Payton from Lockhart's properties on Gamble Street, Edwards Street and Willis Avenue.

¶9. In his preliminary report, Headrick suggested that, notwithstanding the 2018 Order's lack of explicit command to sell the properties located on Dearborn Street, Palmetto Street, Gamble Street and Edwards Street, all real property identified in the 2018 Order should be sold. Headrick also recommended that he be allowed to choose a realtor for the property sales. Further, Headrick recommended the services of an accountant or other professional to aid in valuation of the various businesses identified in the 2018 Order. Moreover, Headrick discussed the location and value of vehicles and other personal property identified in the 2018 Order, noting a need for additional information from each of the parties.

¶10. In November 2018, Headrick filed his supplemental report. Headrick reiterated his previous recommendation that he engage a realtor to sell all real property identified in the 2018 Order and divide the proceeds evenly between Lockhart and Payton and, more specifically, that each property be sold "as is" and that "[i]f a property is ‘upside down’ and more is owed on it than it is worth, then it seems fair that both parties share equally that burden as they are equally sharing in the benefits of the dividing of this marital real property." Further, Headrick recommended that Payton be allowed to stay at the marital residence during efforts to sell, be required to cooperate with the sale of the property and be allowed to keep the items remaining at the marital home. As for the proceeds awarded to each party from their respective businesses, Headrick again recommended forensic accounting to determine the proceeds attributable to each business. Headrick reviewed the results of his investigation into the location of certain vehicles and other items of...