Chancery Judge in Rankin County, the heart of the great State of Mississippi!
Rankin County, Mississippi
Joined March 2009
- Tweets2.4K
- Following897
- Followers1.9K
- Likes439
8:30 am to 3 pm today, MC School of Law hosts a GAL CLE. There is an exceptional cadre of presenters, including Megan Hasie, Natalie Gideon, Adria Johnson, Trey O'Cain, Macy Mitchell, Adam Kilgore, Judge R. Sheldon, & Judge B. Richard.
Don't be a square!
The nine objections within "Object to the form?"
Leading, compound question, argumentative, asked/answered, assumes facts not in evidence, ambiguous/confusing, misleading, narrative, and repetitious.
"Object to the form of the question."
"Come again?"
If you've ever wondered what that means, click this link, which takes you to Judge Primeaux's blog. It's an oldie but a goodie.
betterchancery.com/2018/07/2…
"When a confidential relationship is shown to have existed between the grantor and grantee at the time of the conveyance, the court will scrutinize the conveyance." Weirich v. Murchison, 200 So. 3d 1085, 1089 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016).
1/
"In any proceeding to contest the validity of a will, all persons interested in such contest shall be made parties." Miss. Code Ann. 91-7-25. This requirement is jurisdictional. Garrett v. Bohannon, 621 So. 2d 935, 937 (Miss. 1993).
The requirements that there be two attesting witnesses to a will, that it be signed by them in the presence of the testator, and that be evidenced by the affixation of their signatures to the document, are indispensable safeguards of the integrity of testamentary documents.
1/
The recent decision of Leger v. Leger (2025-CA-56-COA) demonstrates the strict interpretation courts give to property settlement agreements entered as part of divorce proceedings. Remember that three-tiered process from Pursue Energy Corp. v. Perkins, 558 So. 2d 349 (Miss. 1990)!
1. Look to the "four corners" of the agreement. Review the actual language used. If clear/unambiguous, uphold the plain language of the agreement, regardless of who is complaining now.
"[R]eal estate descends directly and immediately upon his death to the heirs or devisees of the deceased owner subject only to the debts of the deceased over and above his personal estate." Parker v. Newell, 245 So. 2d 575, 576 (Miss. 1971).
You obtain a divorce in another state, but cannot divide Mississippi property b/c the foreign state lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant. What next? Read the Staggs v. Staggs case (2024-CA-01308-COA) rendered 10/20/26. A few nit-picky "technicalities" are answered.
Miss. Uniform Chancery Court Rule 3.09(A): "The chancellor may dispense with argument in any action."
MRCP 78: "To expedite its business, the court may make provision by rule or order for the submission and determination of motions without oral hearing . . . ."
"The chancery court should never act finally on a state of facts so inadequately developed in material details that the appellate court cannot tell where the inference has ended and where the conjecture has begun." Shelson, Miss. Chancery Prac. sec. 31:46, at 375 (2017 ed.).
Miss. R. Civ. P. 12(b): "If a pleading sets forth a claim for relief to which the adverse party is not required to serve a responsive pleading, he may assert at trial any defense in law or fact to that claim for relief."
The writ of ne exeat regno is an equitable process to detain a person within the state in order to remain amenable to the process of the court during the pendency of an action.
1/
"Chancellors should grant a divorce on the ground of constructive desertion only in extreme cases." One such case, involving "inexcusable long-continued refusal of sexual relations," is Bartunek v. Bartunek, just handed down from the Miss. Ct. of Apps. (2025-CA-00353-COA).
Kicking the hornet nest: Before enactment of the new statutory presumption favoring joint custody under Miss. Code Ann. 93-5-24, chancellors enjoyed considerable discretion to deviate from the statutory child-support guidelines in cases involving joint physical custody.
1/
This means that in all situations where joint physical custody is awarded the court is bound to calculate and award support per this new statute. So, parents cannot agree to child support in an ID divorce unless it computes with 93-5-24.
5/