Magee v. Magee

13 Citing cases

  1. Urban v. Urban

    No. 2022-CP-00195-COA (Miss. Ct. App. Sep. 5, 2023)   Cited 1 times

    However, in those decisions, we treated "motions for contempt" and "motions for modification" as complaints or petitions because the "motions" were reigniting dormant proceedings. See Magee v. Magee, 754 So.2d 1275, 1281 (¶15) (Miss. Ct. App. 1999) ("The initiation of such actions should be by filing 'complaints' or 'petitions' and 'counterclaims' or 'cross-claims' (whichever might be appropriate), not 'motions' as was done in this case."); M.R.C.P. 81(d)(3) & cmt. ("Initiating Rule 81(d) actions by 'motion' is not intended."); 1 Jeffrey Jackson et al., Mississippi Civil Procedure § 5:23 (updated May 2023).

  2. Phang v. Phang

    350 So. 3d 1154 (Miss. Ct. App. 2022)

    ¶18. "The amount of an alimony award is largely within the discretion of the chancellor[.]" Magee v. Magee , 754 So. 2d 1275, 1279 (¶7) (Miss. Ct. App. 1999).

  3. Dixon v. Dixon

    238 So. 3d 1191 (Miss. Ct. App. 2018)   Cited 7 times

    See, e.g. , De Marco v. De Marco , 199 Miss. 165, 168, 24 So.2d 358, 359 (Miss. 1946) (holding that alimony generally "takes precedence over" "obligations imposed ... by a second marriage"); Rushing v. Rushing , 909 So.2d 155, 159 (¶ 17) (Miss. Ct. App. 2005) (holding that a payee was not entitled to a modification of alimony based on his remarriage and two new children—"when [he] remarried and fathered two children, he knew of his obligation to [his ex-wife]"); Magee v. Magee , 754 So.2d 1275, 1280 (¶ 11) (Miss. Ct. App. 1999) (holding that a payee was not entitled to a modification based on new personal bills and debts).III.

  4. Plummer v. Plummer

    235 So. 3d 195 (Miss. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 3 times

    "In order to justify the modification of a divorce decree, there must be a material and substantial change in the circumstances of the parties arising subsequently to the entry of the decree." Magee v. Magee , 754 So.2d 1275, 1279 (¶ 7) (Miss. Ct. App. 1999). Our supreme court has held that in the event of a material change of circumstances periodic alimony may be terminated upon an order of the court.

  5. McMinn v. McMinn

    171 So. 3d 511 (Miss. Ct. App. 2015)

    ¶ 18. Alimony may be modified if there has been a material change of circumstances. Magee v. Magee, 754 So.2d 1275, 1278 (¶ 8) (Miss.Ct.App.1999). “The change must occur as a result of after-arising circumstances of the parties not reasonably anticipated at the time of the agreement.

  6. McMinn v. McMinn

    171 So. 3d 511 (Miss. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 4 times
    In McMinn, the ex-wife "regularly stayed overnight with her boyfriend on weekends and several days during the week, and went on vacations with him and his family"; however, the two maintained separate residences and finances.

    ¶ 18. Alimony may be modified if there has been a material change of circumstances. Magee v. Magee, 754 So.2d 1275, 1278 (¶ 8) (Miss.Ct.App.1999). “The change must occur as a result of after-arising circumstances of the parties not reasonably anticipated at the time of the agreement.

  7. Peterson v. Peterson

    129 So. 3d 255 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 9 times
    Reversing and remanding for a chancellor to consider a spouse's ability to pay alimony while maintaining as normal a life as possible with a decent standard of living because alimony awards in excess of a spouse's ability to pay are per se unreasonable

    “The amount of an alimony award is largely within the discretion of the chancellor[.]” Magee v. Magee, 754 So.2d 1275, 1279 (¶ 7) (Miss.Ct.App.1999). Unless the chancellor is in manifest error and abused her discretion, we will not reverse. Armstrong v. Armstrong, 618 So.2d 1278, 1280 (Miss.

  8. Pearson v. Browning

    106 So. 3d 845 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 12 times
    Finding "Rule 81(d) governs the need for additional summons on the defendant" in a contempt matter

    Barfield v. State, 749 So.2d 331, 333 n. 1 (Miss.Ct.App.1999) (addressing a motion for contempt as a petition). “[F]iling a ‘motion’ is not proper procedure....” Glass v. Glass, 857 So.2d 786, 792 (¶ 22) (Miss.Ct.App.2003) (Bridges, J., concurring); see also Magee v. Magee, 754 So.2d 1275, 1281 (¶ 15) (Miss.Ct.App.1999). Parties should begin “proceeding[s] with a properly served complaint or petition.”

  9. McMinn v. McMinn

    NO. 2013-CA-00054-COA (Miss. Ct. App. Dec. 7, 2012)

    ¶18. Alimony may be modified if there has been a material change of circumstances. Magee v. Magee, 754 So. 2d 1275, 1278 (¶8) (Miss. Ct. App. 1999). "The change must occur as a result of after-arising circumstances of the parties not reasonably anticipated at the time of the agreement.

  10. Pearson v. Browning

    NO. 2010-CA-02096-COA (Miss. Ct. App. Sep. 4, 2012)

    [F]iling a 'motion' is not proper procedure . . . ." Glass v. Glass, 857 So. 2d 786, 792 (¶22) (Miss. Ct. App. 2003) (Bridges, J., concurring); see also Magee v. Magee, 754 So. 2d 1275, 1281 (¶15) (Miss. Ct. App. 1999). Parties should begin "proceeding[s] with a properly served complaint or petition."