Nichols v. Nichols, 46419
| Decision Date | 22 November 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 46419,46419 |
| Citation | 254 So.2d 726 |
| Parties | Preston L. NICHOLS v. Lillie Frank NICHOLS. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Scales & Scales, Derek E. Parker, Jackson, for appellant.
William Ward, Starkville, for appellee.
A petition for modification of a divorce decree was filed by the appellant (husband) wherein he averred that the circumstances of the parties had materially changed and asked the Chancery Court of Oktibbeha County to modify or terminate the alimony payments ordered under the original decree. Trial was held in the August 1970 term, whereupon the chancellor denied the relief, and husband appealed.
The appellee (wife) was granted a divorce from the husband on June 29, 1965. Prior to the divorce, husband and wife enterred into an agreement in which husband agreed to convey to wife the equity in the house that the parties had bought and were paying for, all of the household furnishings, their 1962 Chevrolet automobile, a $1,000 life insurance policy on the life of husband, and to pay her $150 per month alimony. This agreement was incorporated in the court's final decree and husband was ordered to sell eighty acres of land which he owned, and to pay wife's debts with the money.
The gross annual earnings of the parties prior to the divorce decree were $4,747 for the husband and $3,285 for the wife, or a differential of $1,462. Both parties have received raises since the divorce, and their present gross annual earnings are $6,960 for the husband and $5,240 for the wife, or a differential of $1,720. Both parties are about the same age, have ailments which are corresponding to their relative ages and sexes, and have practically the same medical, drug, and household expenses.
Since the divorce, husband has remarried and moved from Starkville to Rankin County. He bought a suburban home located on three acres of land near Jackson. Wife has not remarried and there are no children or other dependents living with her. She is occupying the same home and driving the same car as at the time of the divorce. Wife testified that she has adjusted to the divorce as much as can be expected.
Husband argues that these facts and the other facts and circumstances show that he is unable to maintain a normal standard of living, and that which his occupation demands, on his present income. Husband further argues that there has been such a material change in the circumstances of the parties as to require modification of the alimony payments. With this contention we agree.
In determining the amount of alimony to be awarded, consideration must be given to the rights of the husband to lead as normal a life as reasonably possible with...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ferguson v. Ferguson, 92-CA-00058
...a standard of living. Such a lopsided result is inequitable, regardless of which spouse was at fault. As stated in Nichols v. Nichols, 254 So.2d 726 (Miss.1971): Any test of the justice of such award must include not only the benefit to the wife but the resultant burden to the husband. Once......
-
Cumberland v. Cumberland
...490 So.2d 866, 871-72 (Miss.1986); Trunzler, 431 So.2d at 1116; Cameron v. Cameron, 276 So.2d 449, 450 (Miss.1973); Nichols v. Nichols, 254 So.2d 726, 727 (Miss.1971). We have specifically said such in cases where the issue as here is child support. Craft v. Craft, 478 So.2d at 264-65; Trun......
-
Armstrong v. Armstrong
... ... Tutor, 494 So.2d 362 (Miss.1986); McKay v. McKay, 312 So.2d 12, 14 (Miss.1975); Nichols v. Nichols, 254 So.2d 726, ... 727 (Miss.1971); Brabham v. Brabham, 226 Miss. 165, 84 So.2d 147 ... ...
-
Turpin v. Turpin
...limits Dr. Turpin's ability to cover his own living expenses and was grossly unfair, inequitable, and manifest error. Nichols v. Nichols, 254 So.2d 726, 727 (Miss.1971). ¶27 Realizing the complex intertwining of funds this couple experienced during their marriage and in light of this Court'......