Collado v. Collado
| Docket Number: | 2017-CA-01644-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-08-2019 Opinion Author: J. Wilson, P.J. Holding: Reversed and rendered. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Modification of property settlement agreement - Private school tuition - Child support - Material change in circumstances Judge(s) Concurring: Barnes, C.J., Carlton, P.J., Greenlee, Westbrooks, Tindell, McDonald, Lawrence, McCarty and CWilson, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - DOMESTIC RELATIONS |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 08-11-2017 Appealed from: RANKIN COUNTY CHANCERY COURT Judge: HON. JOHN C. McLAURIN JR. Disposition: Ordered Chris to continue to pay private school tuition for his four children. Case Number: 61CH1:15-cv-01579 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Jerry Christopher Collado |
HEATHER MARIE ABY |
|
|
| Appellee: | Jennifer Jordan Collado (Tyndall) | GARY LEE WILLIAMS | ||
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Modification of property settlement agreement - Private school tuition - Child support - Material change in circumstances |
| Summary of the Facts: | Jennifer and Chris Collado were granted an irreconcilable differences divorce. The chancery court approved the parties’ child custody and property settlement agreement and incorporated the agreement as part of the divorce decree. The agreement granted Jennifer custody of the parties’ four children and required Chris to pay child support. The agreement also provided that “Husband agrees to continue to pay for the minor children’s private school education, so long as the parties jointly agree for the children to be enrolled in private school, including tuition and registration fees, continuing through each child obtaining a high school diploma. . . .” Jennifer later filed a petition to modify the divorce judgment, alleging that Chris had “threatened to refuse to pay for the [private school education] of one or two of the minor children.” She asked the court to order Chris to continue to pay for the private school education of all four children. The chancellor ordered Chris to continue paying for the private school education of all four children. Chris appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Chris argues that the chancellor erred by modifying the clear and unambiguous terms of the parties’ child custody and property settlement agreement and that the chancellor should have applied principles of contract law to the agreement and should not have considered his ability to pay. When the parties have complied with the irreconcilable differences divorce statute, their agreement concerning matters of custody, support, alimony, and/or property division becomes a part of the final decree for all legal intents and purposes. A court-approved agreement to pay child support is subject to modification, and the rules governing its modification are the same as if the chancellor had made a support award after a contested divorce trial. The party seeking a modification of the agreement to pay child support bears the burden of proving a material change in circumstances that was not foreseeable prior to the time of the agreement. Private-school tuition is considered part of child support. Therefore, provisions of a settlement and judgment concerning the payment of private school tuition are subject to modification. Here, Jennifer failed to prove any material change in circumstances that was not foreseeable prior to the time of the agreement. The only thing that changed was Chris’s position as to where two of his four children should go to school. Chris’s decision that two of his children should attend public school was a change in circumstances, but it was a change that the parties’ court-approved settlement agreement expressly contemplated. The agreement requires Chris to pay private school tuition only “so long as the parties jointly agree for the children to be enrolled in private school.” Therefore, the chancellor erred by ordering Chris to continue to pay tuition for children that Chris preferred to send to public school. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
