It seems we pine for yesteryear when men were gentlemen. Well, guess what? They weren’t!!
Disputes were resolved with a fight to the death. Political rhetoric was uglier then than now and physical altercations were certainly more prevalent then than now between candidates.
Mississippi law provided then (and now),
“Every person who shall challenge another to a duel…or who shall accept any such challenge…or who shall be present at the time of any duel with deadly weapons, either as second, aid, or surgeon, …or give assistance to such duel, shall, on conviction thereof, be fined in a sum not less than $300.00 nor exceeding $1,000.00…, or be imprisoned not less than 6-months in the county jail, or both.”
Mississippi Courts have not historically favored Joint Custody. A new Bill would require a presumption of Joint Custody is best for a child, that would have to be overcome if a parent doesn’t agree…
Senate Bill 2484 seeks to amend the current custody statute 93-5-24, as follows: “
(2) * * * (a) (i) There shall be a rebuttable presumption that joint custody and equally shared parenting time is in the best interest of the child. If the court does not grant joint custody and/or equally shared parenting time, the court shall construct a parenting time schedule which maximizes the time each parent has with the child and ensures the best interest of the child is met. (ii) The presumption created in subparagraph (i) of this paragraph shall be rebuttable by a preponderance of the evidence. A court that does not award joint custody with equally shared parenting time shall document the reasons for deviating from the presumption. (b) Upon petition of both parents, the court may grant legal and/or physical custody to one (1) parent.”
This is an interesting Bill and in theory how Custody determinations should begin anyway. However, it goes further than current law in creating a rebuttable presumption and then requiring documenting the reasons for deviating from the presumption if the court does not grant joint physical custody and/or equally shared parenting time.
Matthew Thompson is a child custody lawyer and believes mom and dad coparenting and working together is what’s best for the child. A set schedule based on the child, with flexibility when warranted is what is best…
A child testifying is an often discussed issue between parents and attorneys in child custody cases.
When parents are getting a divorce the child usually knows more than their parents think. The child most likely witnessed fights, bad conduct and sometimes even dangerous conduct.
In Mississippi law, the leading authority is Jethrow vs. Jethrow, 571 So.2d 270 (Miss. 1990). This case lays the groundwork that the Court should use when assessing child testimony. The basic premise is, as follows;
A child witnesses of tender years*, 12 and under for testimony purposes, testifying is subject to the discretion of the Judge. (*this tender years is different than the “tender years” doctrine favoring a mother when a child is very young, under 2-3).
Before allowing such testimony the Judge “should satisfy himself that the child has the ability to perceive and remember events, to understand and answer questions intelligently, and to comprehend and accept the importance of truthfulness.”
Before excluding the testimony of a child witness of tender years in a divorce proceeding, the chancellor at a minimum should follow the procedure required by Crownover v. Crownover, 33 Ill.App.3rd 327, 337 N.E.2d 56 (1975):
The first hurdle is whether the child is competent to testify.
The Judge should confer in camera (meaning in the Judge’s chambers/office) with the child and determine whether or not the child’s testimony should be heard
The Judge has considerable discretion in conducting proceedings of this type, meaning it’s a judgment call.
The court should not, however, reject outright proposed testimony of a child in custody proceedings, where the omission of such crucial testimony might be harmful to the child’s best interests.
The trial court should take great pains to have an in camera conference with the child to determine the competency of the child,
and determine the competency of any evidence which the child might present.
The court should determine whether the best interests of the child would be served by permitting her to testify, or
Whether the child should be sheltered from testifying and being subjected to a vigorous cross-examination.
The Judge should report the essential material matters developed at the in camera conference on the record.
The Court should state the reasons for allowing or disallowing the testimony of the child, and
The Court should note the factual information which the court developed from the conference with the child which would be considered by the court in its ultimate determinations in the case.
Generally, the testimony of a child called as a witness in a divorce case should not be excluded for reasons other than competency, or evidentiary defects, or for the protection of the child. (24 Am.Jur.2d, Divorce and Separation, A 415). There should not be a summary refusal to inquire as to the competency of the child to testify and also of the competency of the proposed testimony of such child in a change of custody proceeding.
“We reiterate that parents in a divorce proceeding should if at all possible refrain from calling any of the children of their marriage, of tender years at least, as witnesses, and counsel should advise their clients against doing so except in the most exigent cases. The reason and wisdom behind this precaution need no amplification. We also hold, however, as we must that no parent can be precluded from having a child of the marriage in a divorce proceeding testify simply because of that fact.”Jethrow v. Jethrow, 571 So.2d 270, 274 (Miss. 1990)(emphasis added).
A child testifying should be avoided, however if it cannot be avoided the above process will likely be used by the Court to determine if and how the child will testify.
Matthew Thompson is a Child Custody Litigation Attorney in Mississippi.
Thirteenth. Upon application of either party, the court may grant a divorce when the court finds there has been an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage and that further attempts at reconciliation are impractical or futile and not in the best interests of the parties or family.
Secondly, a Joint Custody bill was proposed. There were several iterations of this legislation, but the gist of it was that the Court was to assume that Joint Physical Custody was in the best interest of the child when parents could not agree (and, even if they could) and if the Court found Joint Physical Custody was not in the best interest of the child it had to state why. (There were some issues with the proposed legislation as it was drafted, but this Bill found some traction and was discussed and bandied about for weeks…ultimately to no avail).
(2) * * * (a) There shall be a presumption, rebuttable by a preponderance of evidence, that joint custody and equally shared parenting time is in the best interest of the child. If the court does not grant joint custody and/or equally shared parenting time, the court shall construct a parenting time schedule which maximizes the time each parent has with the child and ensuring the best interest of the child is met. (b) Upon petition of both parents, the court may grant legal and/or physical custody to one parent.
Both bills failed and there are limited changes to MS Family Law. A blog for another day.
Matthew Thompson is a Family Law Attorney in MS and is in favor of some common sense changes in Mississippi Law.
I have written several times on sometimes just not being ready. I have seen multiple instances of person just not being ready…
What are the signs of Not Being Ready?
Things are moving TOO Fast.
The divorce process is actually fairly slow in Mississippi. It is typically at least 60 days with the average cases taking closer to 90 days, if uncontested. If contested, the case could take 6-18 months. A few take even longer!
Things are TOO Emotional.
Of course divorce is highly emotional. In some respects you may never “get over it.” However, the best results require that you treat the financial aspects as a business transaction. If you are so focused on the emotion, getting even or some other aspect, you’ll regret it later.
It makes NO Sense.
If you are in a brain fog and cannot explain in plain terms what the lawyer has explained to you, you may not be ready. I don’t expect you to know every legal term of art, but there are some very important concepts you need to understand.
These are just a few indicators of Not being ready. Be on the lookout for these signs in your spouse and/or yourself. Recognizing these issues will allow for them to be better handled.
Matthew Thompson is a Divorce and Custody lawyer in Mississippi and warns you that negotiating a divorce when you are not ready may result in regret.
These things do not go together, but are a reality for many…
Divorce situations at Christmas time add another level of stress to an already stressful time. Forced family togetherness can bring out short tempers and hard feelings. Games, one-upmanship and fake platitudes are an easy trap to fall into. So, what can you do? Don’t.
Make Christmas about something bigger than the infighting. As a person of faith, make it about that. Not super religious? Make it about maximizing the quality time you get to spend with your loved ones. Make it about a time of peace and reconciliation. If that isn’t possible due to your ex-spouse, disengage, step back and just be.
Holiday stress and depression is a real thing. It is something that needs to be handled as such.
Matthew Thompson is a divorce lawyer in Mississippi and wishes you a safe and Merry Christmas.
Family law is tough. It is tough to go through, deal with, and be involved in.
It can also be unfair. But wait, the Judge has to be fair, right? Yes, but the Judge’s definition of fair and yours will be different.
Also, the whole circumstance may be unfair. You can live your best life and still find yourself in the divorce attorney’s office.
The handful of times that I have seen even good results feel bad is when one party is just not ready. They did not want a divorce. They did not want to be in my office. And, they did not do anything (or any one thing) to result in needing a divorce.
These are often the hardest circumstances. The client may be right. This may all be unfair, but it nonetheless is happening.
So what do you do if you realize it’s too soon and you’re not ready? Get an experienced lawyer. Confer with experts; a counselor, a CPA or financial planner, your pastor, your trusted family and friends.
Get prepared and be intentional, even if you don’t want to.
Matthew Thompson is a child custody and divorce lawyer in Mississippi and knows when it’s too soon. However, the law doesn’t always allow for the mental processing necessary for all clients.
Mississippi SENATE BILL NO. 2644 proposed common sense changes to divorce laws. The legislation met a common fate of most proposed changes to bring MS in line with 48 other states. IT DIED.
Description: Divorce; authorize where marriage is irretrievably broken. Disposition: Dead
The proposal would have allowed for a basis for divorce if parties had been actually separated for over 1-year and would have allowed the Chancellor to grant a divorce if he/she was convinced that the marriage was irretrievably broken.
That is all that was proposed. It failed. Again.
Matthew Thompson is a divorce/family law attorney and still supports common sense changes to family law in Mississippi, as he has for 18-years.