Rainer v. Rainer, No. 52349

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
Writing for the CourtBefore PATTERSON; BOWLING; PATTERSON
Citation393 So.2d 475
PartiesSylvester M. RAINER, Sr. v. Mrs. Louise RAINER.
Decision Date28 January 1981
Docket NumberNo. 52349

Page 475

393 So.2d 475
Sylvester M. RAINER, Sr.
v.
Mrs. Louise RAINER.
No. 52349.
Supreme Court of Mississippi.
Jan. 28, 1981.

Page 476

Robert D. Jones, Martin & Jones, Meridian, for appellant.

Joe R. Odom, Lawrence W. Rabb, Meridian, for appellee.

Before PATTERSON, C. J., and LEE and BOWLING, JJ.

BOWLING, Justice, for the Court:

This cause involves divorce and support proceedings between appellee and appellant and originated in the Chancery Court of Lauderdale County.

Appellee and cross-appellant, Mrs. Louise Rainer, filed her bill of complaint for divorce and other relief alleging that her husband, appellant and cross-appellee, Sylvester M. Rainer, Sr., was guilty of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment. This is the second appearance of the cause before this Court. The first appeal involved the final decree in the original action, which decree granted Mrs. Rainer a divorce on the ground alleged. Additional provisions of the decree awarded her the sum of $190 per month for twelve months as alimony and divided certain property between the parties. Mr. Rainer was given the exclusive right to use and occupy the home of the parties in which they had lived for many years. They had been married over thirty years and had reared three children. The title to the property during the period of time always had been solely in the name of Mr. Rainer. In the divorce decree, no attorneys' fees were allowed for the final hearing.

Mrs. Rainer appealed to this Court from the alimony and attorneys' fee provisions of the lower court decree. This Court, in cause No. 50,585, reversed the cause, holding that the award of alimony by the lower court was grossly inadequate and that Mrs. Rainer should be allowed a reasonable sum toward fees for her legal representation.

On remand, the cause finally came on for hearing by the lower court on February 26, 1980. At this hearing, it developed that between the date the opinion was issued and the date of the court's mandate, Mr. Rainer sold the home for $27,000. It was also developed by preliminary motions that subsequent to the original divorce hearing, Mr. Rainer's mother had died, leaving him, among other things, her home, into which he had moved and where he was living without rent obligations.

Page 477

Mrs. Rainer's attorneys instituted proceedings in an attempt to have the conveyance of the house formerly occupied by the parties set aside. After a court hearing, this attempt was unsuccessful.

Prior to the hearing resulting in the present appeal, attorneys for Mrs. Rainer filed her motion for the court to take into consideration the change of circumstances between the time of the original divorce hearing and the remand hearing. This motion was granted by the lower court over objection by Mr. Rainer's attorneys.

After a full hearing resulting in the present appeal, the chancellor issued his decree providing that (1) Mr. Rainer pay to Mrs. Rainer immediately the sum of $13,000 as alimony payment; (2) the sum of $150 per month from March 1, 1980 (the approximate date of the decree) as alimony, said payments to continue until the remarriage or death of Mrs. Rainer, and (3) Mr. Rainer was ordered to pay Mrs. Rainer the sum of $2,500 toward her legal fees, which at that time had amounted to over $5,000.

Mr. Rainer filed his appeal and assigned as errors the following:

1. The lower court erred in not sustaining appellant's motion in limine and motion to dismiss and disallow evidence of the financial status of the parties subsequent to the date of divorce to determine an alimony increase.

2. On remand hearing, the lower court erred, over objection of appellant, by allowing appellee to plead a material change of circumstances.

3. On remand...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 practice notes
  • Tilley v. Tilley, No. 91-CA-467
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • December 10, 1992
    ...lower court allowed. See Cleveland v. Cleveland, 600 So.2d 193 (Miss.1992); Tutor v. Tutor, 494 So.2d 362 (Miss.1986); Rainer v. Rainer, 393 So.2d 475 (Miss.1981). Likewise, this Court has reduced the amount allowed by the lower court or reversed the award of alimony outright in some cases.......
  • Lowrey v. Lowrey, No. 2007-CA-01988-SCT.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • November 5, 2009
    ...618 So.2d at 1280; Albright, 437 So.2d at 1005; Miss. Code Ann. §§ 43-19-101, 43-19-103 (Rev. 2004). See also Rainer v. Rainer, 393 So.2d 475, 477-78 (Miss.1981); McKay v. McKay, 312 So.2d 12, 14 ¶ 28. Ferguson requires consideration of the following factors, or a finding of inapplicability......
  • Cleveland v. Cleveland, No. 90-CA-0995
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • May 13, 1992
    ...See Tutor v. Tutor, 494 So.2d 362, 365 (Miss.1986) (lump sum alimony increased from $50,000.00 to $150,000.00); Rainer v. Rainer, 393 So.2d 475, 478 (Miss.1981) (monthly periodic alimony increased from $150.00 to $250.00). To like effect, there have been instances wherein this Court has red......
  • Boykin v. Boykin, No. 07-CA-59612
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • June 27, 1990
    ...of living--taking into account the wife's own resources and the husband's ability to pay. Wood, 495 So.2d at 506; Rainer v. Rainer, 393 So.2d 475, 478 Applying case law to the case sub judice, the undisputed facts reveal that--at the time of the hearing--both parties were in good health. He......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
12 cases
  • Tilley v. Tilley, No. 91-CA-467
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • December 10, 1992
    ...lower court allowed. See Cleveland v. Cleveland, 600 So.2d 193 (Miss.1992); Tutor v. Tutor, 494 So.2d 362 (Miss.1986); Rainer v. Rainer, 393 So.2d 475 (Miss.1981). Likewise, this Court has reduced the amount allowed by the lower court or reversed the award of alimony outright in some cases.......
  • Lowrey v. Lowrey, No. 2007-CA-01988-SCT.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • November 5, 2009
    ...618 So.2d at 1280; Albright, 437 So.2d at 1005; Miss. Code Ann. §§ 43-19-101, 43-19-103 (Rev. 2004). See also Rainer v. Rainer, 393 So.2d 475, 477-78 (Miss.1981); McKay v. McKay, 312 So.2d 12, 14 ¶ 28. Ferguson requires consideration of the following factors, or a finding of inapplicability......
  • Cleveland v. Cleveland, No. 90-CA-0995
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • May 13, 1992
    ...See Tutor v. Tutor, 494 So.2d 362, 365 (Miss.1986) (lump sum alimony increased from $50,000.00 to $150,000.00); Rainer v. Rainer, 393 So.2d 475, 478 (Miss.1981) (monthly periodic alimony increased from $150.00 to $250.00). To like effect, there have been instances wherein this Court has red......
  • Boykin v. Boykin, No. 07-CA-59612
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • June 27, 1990
    ...of living--taking into account the wife's own resources and the husband's ability to pay. Wood, 495 So.2d at 506; Rainer v. Rainer, 393 So.2d 475, 478 Applying case law to the case sub judice, the undisputed facts reveal that--at the time of the hearing--both parties were in good health. He......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT