Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Charles J. BARNES, Jr. v. Homa Lee BARNES.
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
¶ 1. On January 14, 1999, we issued our per curiam affirmance of the chancellor's judgment in this case. Appellant Charles J. Barnes, Jr. has filed his motion for rehearing, asking this Court to reconsider our decision based upon the chancellor's award of $1,750 per month in periodic alimony to his ex-wife, Homa Lee Barnes. Finding no error on the part of the chancellor in this case, we deny Mr. Barnes's motion for rehearing.
¶ 2. Specifically, Mr. Barnes complains that the chancellor's award of alimony was clearly erroneous, because it was based upon Mr. Barnes's previous earning capacity through his business, Barnes Forest Products, which went bankrupt in 1996. See Wright v. Wright, 723 So.2d 1168, ¶ 11 (Miss.1998) (standard of review for alimony reward). He asserts that his current monthly income of $2,409 does not allow him to maintain a reasonable standard of living after paying $1,750 per month in alimony. Mr. Barnes also alleges that the alimony award was erroneous considering Mrs. Barnes's ability to earn a living and relatively low monthly expenses with no car note, the sale of the marital home, and no minor children to support.
¶ 3. We find that the chancellor properly applied the factors for determination of alimony set out in Armstrong v. Armstrong, 618 So.2d 1278, 1280 (Miss.1993). The chancellor correctly found that Mrs. Barnes was entitled to periodic alimony while she adjusts to a new life of financial independence. Mr. Barnes may not be able to attain the same level of income he once enjoyed while running his own business. However, considering the parties' respective earning capacities, we find that the award of $1,750 per month in periodic alimony was not clearly erroneous or manifestly wrong. As a result, Mr. Barnes's motion for rehearing is denied.
¶ 4. MOTION FOR REHEARING DENIED.
SULLIVAN, Presiding Justice, for the Court:
PRATHER, C.J., PITTMAN, P.J., BANKS, SMITH, MILLS AND WALLER, JJ., CONCUR. McRAE, J., DISSENTS WITHOUT SEPARATE WRITTEN OPINION.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 97-CA-00587-SCT.
Decided: March 04, 1999
Court: Supreme Court of Mississippi.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)