I N T H E SUPR EM E C O UR T O F M I SS I SS I PPI NO. 2 0 1 1 - CT - 0 1 0 9 6 - S CT W I LL I AM ANDREW

S HO RT
v. KAT HRYN TAYLOR S

HO RT ON W RI T OF CE RT I ORARI D A T E O F JU D G M E N T : 06/ 29/ 2011 T RI AL J UDGE : HON. T AL M ADGE D. L I T T L E J OHN COURT F ROM W HI CH APP EAL ED: LE E COUNTY CHANCERY COURT AT T OR NE YS F OR AP P E L L ANT : J E NE S S A C AR T E R H I CK S D A V ID E A R L R O Z IE R , J R . ATTO RN EY FO R A PP ELLEE: DER EK L. HA LL NAT UR E OF T HE CA S E : CI VI L - DOMES T I C R E L AT I ONS D I SPO SI T I O N : R E V E R SE D A N D R E M A N D E D - 02/ 06/ 2014 M OT I ON F OR RE HE AR I NG F I L E D: M ANDAT E I S S UE D: EN BA NC. PI ERCE, J UST I CE, FOR TH E COU RT: ¶ 1 . W i l l i a m An d r e w S h o r t ( An d y ) a n d Ka th ry n T a y l o r S h o r t we r e d i v o r c e d i n 2 0 0 7 . As partof the di vor ce j udgm ent , the part i es ent er ed i nt o a pr opert y, ch i l d- s uppor t , and chi l dcus t ody agr eements t i pul at i ng thatA ndy w oul d pay chi l d s uppor ti n the amount of $50, 000 p e r y e a r u n til th e c h ild b e g a n k in d e rg a rte n ; th e re a fte r, h e w o u ld p a y fifte e n p e rc e n t o f h is
a d ju s te d g ro s s in c o m e (A G I) , n e v e r t o fa ll b e lo w $ 3 6 ,0 0 0 p e r y e a r. ¶ 2 . In 2 0 1 1 , K a th ry n f ile d a c o m p la in t fo r c o n tem p t, alleg in g th a t A n d y h a d fa iled to
m ak e c h il d -sup p o rtp ay m en ts. A n d y fil ed a c o u n ter-com p lai n t f o r cu stod y an d to m o d if y chi l d s uppor t . A ndy al l eged a m at er i al change i n ci r cumst ance s beca us e of a s i gni f i cant

### 2

r educt i on i n hi s adj us t ed gr os s i ncome, r equi r i ng a new chi l d- s uppor tcal cul at i on . T he chanc el l orf

ound thatno m at er i al change i n ci r cumst ance s had occurr ed and or der ed A ndy t o cont i nue payi ng the mi ni m um r equi r ementof $36, 000 peryeari n chi l d s uppor t , pur s uant to th e o rig in a l ch ild -su p p o rt a g re e m e n t. ¶3 . A n d y ap p ea led, arg u in g that the ch an ce ll o r h ad d isr eg ard ed statu tory ch il d -sup p o rt g u i d e l i n e s , th a tth e c h i l d
- s u p p o rtp r o v i s i o n i n th e p a rt i e s ’ a g r e e m e n tv i o l a t e s Mi s s i s s i p p i l a w, and thatthe cha ncel l orhad err ed i n cal cul at i ng A ndy’s ad j us t ed gr os s i ncome. T he M i s s i s s i ppi C our tof

A ppeal s af

f i r m ed, f i ndi ng thatthe chanc el l orha d c ons i der ed al l of the appr opr i at e f

act or s f orm odi f i cat i on and had support ed hi s concl us i ons w i th f i ndi ngs of

f act from the re co rd . Sh ort

v. Sh ort , N o . 2 0 1 1 -C A -0 1 0 9 6 -C O A , 2 0 1 3 W L 3 2 9 0 3 9 , * 2 (M iss . C t. A p p . Jan . 2 9 , 2 0 1 3 ). ¶4 . A n d y fil ed a p eti ti o n for w ri t of cert i orari , s t at i ng thatthe C our tof A ppeal s had f

ai l ed t o addr es s hi s ar gum entthatthe aut om at i c chi l d- s uppor t - cal cul at i on claus e vi ol at es M i s s i s s i ppi l aw . A ndy al s o cl ai m ed thatthe C our tof A ppeal s f

ai l ed t o cons i derthatthe chanc el l or had w hol l y di s r egar ded the s t atut ory chi l d- s uppor tgui del i nes , had err ed by af f i rmi ng the c ha nc e l l or ’ s f i ndi ng thatno m at er i al change i n ci r cumst ance s had occ urr ed, and had ov erl oo ked the sub st anti ve err or i n the chan cel l or’ s cal culat i on of A nd y’s adj ust ed g ross i ncome. W e gr ant ed cert i orari . S TANDA RD O F REVI EW ¶5. F ac tual fi n d ing s m ad e b y the c h an ce ry c o u rtw i l l not be dis turbed if they are “s uppor t ed by s ubst ant i al evi dence unl es s [ w e] can s ay w i th r eas onabl e ce r t ai nty thatthe chanc el l orabus ed hi s dis cr et i on, w as m ani f es t l y w r ong, cl ear l y err oneous orappl i ed an

### 3

err oneous l egal s t andar d. ” Bi gl ane v. Undert

he H il l Cor p. , 9 49 S o. 2d 9, 14 ( M i s s . 2007) ( quot i ng C um m ings v. B enderm an , 6 8 1 S o . 2 d 9 7 , 1 0 0 (M is s . 1 9 9 6 ))
. ¶6. A ddi t i on al l y, supp ort agr eement s pur s uant t o an i rr econc i l abl e- di f f er ence s di vor ce cannotbe modi f

i ed w i thouta f

i ndi ng of a mat er i al change i n ci r cumst ance s , w hi ch w as not fo re s e e a b le p ri o r t o th e tim e o f t h e ju d g m e n t o f d iv o rc e . T in g le v . T

in g le , 573 So. 2d 1389, 1 3 9 1 (M is s . 1 9 9 0 ). A N A L Y S IS I . W h e th e r th e c h ild -s u p p o r t o b lig a ti o n is m o d if ia b le . ¶7 . A ndy ar gues t hatt he t r i al cour tf ou nd tha tthe c hi l d- s up po r tob l i ga t i on w a s not
m o d ifiab le a n d sta tes th a t h e is fo re v e r b o u n d to p a y a t lea st $ 3 ,0 0 0 p e r m o n th in c h ild
s uppor tw i thoutr egar d forhi s or gl obal ci r cumst ance s . I ti s cl earf r om the r ecor d that , dur i ng the cha ncel l or ’ s rul i ng on w hethera mat er i al change i n ci r cum st ances had occ urr ed, he conduct ed a f

ul l anal ys i s un der the f act or s s etf

or th i n P i

pkin v. D olan , 788 So. 2d 834 (M iss . C t. A p p . 2 0 0 1 ). H o w e v e r, th e c h a n c e llo r la terfo c u se d o n th e m a n d a to ry lan g u a g e in th e p a rties ’ a g re e m e n t stip u latin g th a t A n d y s h o u ld n e v e r p a y les s th a n $ 3 ,0 0 0 p e r m o n th in
c h ild su p p o rt. U lti m a tely , the c h a n c e llo r ru led th a t th e c h ild -s u p p o rt a g re e m e n t w o u ld
r emai n i n ef

f ectba s ed on hi s c ons i der at i on of the f act or s , the bes ti nt er es tof the chi l d, and A n d y ’s a g re e m e n t to b e b o u n d b y th e te rm s o f t h e c h ild -s u p p o rta g re e m e n t. ¶8 . T he chanc el l or ’ s rul i ng gi ve s the i mpr e s s i on tha tthe c hi l d- s up po r ta gr e e ment w as
u n m o d ifiab le be ca u se A n d y h ad ag ree d to b e b o u n d b y it s term s. H o w ev er, sup p o rt
o b lig a tio n s m o st c e rta in ly c a n b e m o d ified w h e n th e re is a fin d in g o f a m a ter ial c h a n g e inTh e p arties areall ow ed to c reate the ir o wn

agre ement, t

he n w iththech an cel lor ’s a pp rov al, 1 theagree m ent is in co rpo rat ed into thedivo rcejudgm ent. Ala ps e o f tim e w illex ist

be tw een wh en theparti es mad e th e agree m ent a nd wh entheagree ment is inc orp orated into th e divo rcejudgment. The chancellorshould l ook to when the parties ’ agr eement was final ized into the divorce judgment when determining if a material change in circumstances, which was not foreseeable at the ti me of the judgment of divorce, has occurred. 

### 4 ci r cumst ance s , w hi ch w as notf or es eeabl e atthe t i m e of the j udgm entof

di vor ce. T

ingle v. 1 T in g le , 573 So. 2d 1389, 1391 ( M i s s . 1990)
. T her ef or e, the cha ncel l or ’ s rul i ng i s r ever s ed, and thi s cas e i s r emanded f ora det erm i nat i on of

w hethera mat er i al change i n ci r cumst ance s h a s o c c u rr e d
. I I . W het her t he chancel l or er red i n fai l i ng t o cons i der t he s t at ut ory g u ide li n es fo r c h il d su p p o rt. ¶ 9 . A n d y as se rts th a t th e tri a l co u rt d isre g a rd e d th e sta tu to ry g u id e lin e s fo r c h ild su p p o rt,
cons t i tut i ng err or . H ow ever , A nd y fai l s t o addr es s thatthe chi l d s uppor tw as or der ed pur s uantt o an agr eementt hatA ndy f r eel y ent er ed i nt o. W e cons i der( 1) the i m por t ance of al l ow i ng p ar t i es t o r eac h thei row n agr eement s dur i ng di vor ce s ett l ement s , and ( 2) the im p o rt a n c e o f h o ld in g p a rt ie s to th o s e a g re e m e n ts . B e ll v. B e ll , 57 2 S o. 2d 84 1, 84 4 (M i ss. 1 9 9 0 ). F u rth er, w h en asse ssing ch il d -sup p o rtan d cu stod y a g ree m en ts, itis c ruc ial to en su re thatthe agr eementi s “ade quat e and s uf f i ci ent ” t o pr ovi de “. . . f orthe ca r e and mai nt enanc e of the chi l dr en. . . . ” B e ll , 5 7 2 S o . 2 d a t 84 5 (citi n g M iss. C o d e A n n . § 9 3 -5-2 (R ev . 2 0 1 3 )). ¶10. H ere, the part i es w er e gi ven the br oad l at i tude pr es cr i bed t o them i n B e ll , a nd t hey
us ed thatl at i tude t o f

orm an agr eementthatthey both pr es ent ed t o the cha ncel l oras s uf f i ci ent to su p p o rt th e ir c h ild . A lth o u g h , o n th e su rfa c e , ita p p e a rs th e a m o u n t o f c h ild su p p o rt is in d e e d h ig h , A n d y fre e ly c o n se n te d to p ro v id e m o re su p p o rt fo r h is c h ild th a n is
re c o m m e n d e d b y th e s ta tu to ry g u id e lin e s . Sti glerv. Sti

gler , 4 8 S o . 3 d 5 4 7 , 5 5 1 (M iss . C t.

### 5

A pp. 2009) ( E s cal at i on cl aus e di d notvi ol at e T edf or d v. D em

ps ey beca us e “. . . part i es m ay i n f actagr ee on thei row n vol i t i on t o do m or e than the l aw r equi r es of them. W her e s uch a
v a lid a g re e m e n t is m a d e , it m a y b e e n fo rc e d ju s t a s a n y o th e r c o n tr a c t.” ). See T edf or d v. D em ps ey , 437 So. 2d 410, 419 ( M i s s . 1983)
. T he f act s of thi s cas e s uppor tthatthe part i es know i ngl y and w i l l i ngl y ent er ed i nt o an agr eementt hatr ef l ect ed both of

thei rdeci s i ons as t o w hatamountw oul d be s uf f i ci entt o s uppor tthei rchi l d. T hus , A ndy s houl d be r equi r ed t o adher e t o the agr eementhe f r eel y ent er ed i nt o, w hi ch w as deemed s uf f i ci entby the
c h a n c e llo r a n d w a s in c o rp o ra ted in to th e ju d g m e n t o f d iv o rc e , u n les s a m a ter ia l ch a n g e in
c ir c u m s ta n c e s is p ro v e n . B e ll , 572 So. 2d at844- 45; s ee al s o Steinerv. Steiner , 788 So. 2d 7 7 1 , 7 7 6 -7 7 (M iss . 2 0 0 1 ) ( D e fe n d a n t w a s n o t re liev e d o f m a k in g “ h ig h ” a lim o n y p a y m e n ts to h is fo rm e r w ife ju st b e c a u se h e m a y h a v e m a d e a “ b a d d e a l.”). T h is iss u e is w ith o u t m e rit. I I I . W h e th e r th e c h ild -s u p p o r t a g r e e m e n t i s b in d in g . ¶11. A ndy r eques t s that thi s C our t addr es s , on f i r s t i m pr es s i on, the enf

or ceabi l i ty of a dee sc a latio n c lau se c o n tain e d in a c h ild -su p p o rt a g re e m e n t. ¶1 2 . T h is C o u rt ’s ev o lving interpre tat ion o n inclu d ing esc alati o n clau ses in ch il d -sup p o rt agr eement s br eaks gr ound i n T edf or d v. D em

ps ey , i n w hi ch w e expl ai ned thates cal at i on cl a us e s c ou l d s a ve pa r t i e s f r om the di s tr e s s tha ta c c ompa ni e s s up po r t - modi f i c a t i on p ro c e e d in g s . T

edford , 4 37 So . 2 d a t4 19 . I n T ed ford , the f

atherw as appea l i ng the chanc el l or ’ s f

i ndi ng thata mat er i al change i n ci r cum st ance s had occ urr ed, w arr ant i ng an in c re a s e in th e a m o u n t o f s u p p o rt . T

edford , 437 So. 2d at418. T hi s C our tnot ed thatthe part i es had, l i ke m any coupl es , “ . . . be en ate ach other ’ s thr oat [ s ] . . . ” f r om the begi nni ng, and the i ncl us i on of

an es cal at i on cl aus e coul d have a voi ded the agoni es of thei rcurr ent

### 6

l i t i gat i on, becaus e cert ai n change s i n ci r cumst ance s gener al l y can be r eas onabl y ant i ci pat ed. T edford , 4 3 7 S o . 2 d at 41 8 -1 9 (“. .
. an y o n e c an rea so n ab ly an ti cipa te: T h at ch il d ren ’s expens es gener al l y w i l l i ncr eas e as they getol der , thatthe f atherand mot her ’ s earni ng
c a p a c ity wi l l g e n e r a l l y i n c r e a s e f r o m y e a rt o y e a r , a n d th a ti n f l a t i o n w i l l c o n t i n u e a ts o me l evel and w i l l part i al l y af f ectboth the chi l dr en’ s expens es and the par ent s ’ earni ng c a p a c ity .” ). ¶13. W e t ake thi s oppor tuni ty t o emphasi ze the f ol l ow i ng gui dance i n T edford : I n the chi l d s uppor tpr ovi s i ons of thei rs epar at i on ag re ement s , the part i es gen eral l y o ug ht t o b e requi red t o incl ud e escal at i on cl auses t i ed to the p arent s’ earni ng s ort o the annual i nf l at i on r at e ort o s om e f

act or ed combi nat i on of

the tw o . T h o u g h u n d e r th e stru c tu re o f th e irre c o n c ilab le d iffe re n c e s s tatu te f r eedom of

contr acti s exal t ed, ther e ar e l i m i t s . T he st atut e r equi r es thatthe chanc el l orf

i nd that“ the part i es ha ve made adequa t e and s uf f i ci entpr ovi s i on b y w ri tte n a g re e m e n t f

o r t h e c u s to d y a n d m a in te n a n c e o f a n y c h ild re n . . . . T edford , 4 3 7 S o . 2 d a t 4 1 9 (c iti n g M iss . C o d e A n n . § 9 3 -5 -2 (S u p p . 1 9 8 2 ) (e m p h a sis ad d ed )). ¶ 1 4 . W ing v. W ingaf f i r m ed T edford , a n d e n c o u ra g e d th e u s e o f e s c a la tio n c la u s e s . W ing
v. W ing , 549 So. 2d 944, 948 (M i s s . 1989)
. T hi s C our ti n W ing sta ted th a t T

edf or d r equi r es that es cal at i on cl auses shou l d b e t i ed t o the inf l at i on rat e, the n on cust od i al parent ’s i ncrease o r d e c re a s e in in c o m e , th e c h ild ’s e x p e n s e s , a n d th e c u s to d ia l p a re n t’ s s e p a ra te in c o m e . W ing , 5 4 9 S o . 2 d a t 9 4 7 . B r uce v. B r uce enf or ced the f

ourf act or s s t at ed i n T

edf or d and W ing , buti nt erpr et ed T

edford to m ean that es cal at i on cl auses m u st be t i ed t o a l l of the f our fa c to rs . B r uce v. B r uce , 6 8 7 S o . 2 d 1 1 9 9 , 1 2 0 2 (M is s . 1 9 9 6 ). ¶15. Forcl ar i ty, w e overrul e B r uce ’s i nterpret at i on that es cal at i on cl auses m u st b e tied to
a ll f o u r f a c to rs . Id . W e f

ocus on the or i gi nal l anguage i n T edf or d pr ovi di ng thates cal at i on

### 7

cl auses s hould be “. .
. t i ed to the p arent s’ earni ng s ort o the annua l i nf l at i on r at e ort o s o me f act or ed combi nat i on of

the tw o. ” T

edford , 4 3 7 S o . 2 d at 41 9 (em p h asis ad d ed ). W e a ffi rm W ing i n t hat t he cr eat i on of es cal at i on cl aus es s houl d begi n w i th a cons i der at i on of the i nfl at i on rat e, the n on cust od i al parent ’s i ncrease ordecrease i n incom e, the ch i l d’s expen ses, a n d th e c u s to d ia l p a re n t’ s s e p a ra te in c o m e . W ing , 549 So. 2d at947. H ow ever , w e ar e not
m andat i ng thates cal at i on cl aus es be s peci f i cal l y t i ed t o a l l f

ourf act or s . For emost , es cal at i on c lau se s m u st a d e q u a tely a n d su ffic ien tly p ro v id e fo r th e c u stod y an d m a in ten a n c e o f th e c h ild p u rs u a n t to M is s is s ip p i C o d e S e c tio n 9 3 -5 -2 . T edford , 4 3 7 S o . 2 d a t 4 1 9 . ¶16. T he es cal at i on cl aus e i n W ing w a s u n e n fo rc e a b le b e c a u se it l a c k e d th e sp e c ificity
re q u ire d fo r th is C o u rt to c o n sid e r it a v a lid a g re e m e n t. W ing , 54 9 S o . 2d at 9 4 8 . T h is C o u rt f ound t ha tRus s e l l W i ng h a d e s t a bl i s he d tha t , when r e a di ng the a gr e e ment , i tc ou l d no tbe i n t e rp r e t e d , a n d i twa s u n c l e a rwh a ta mo u n twa s o we d , w h a ty e a rth e c l a u s e b e c a me e ff e c tiv e , a n d w h a t c o n s u m e r p ri c e in d e x w a s to b e u s e d
. I d . a t 9 4 7 . ¶1 7 . H e re , th e re is n o q u e stio n th a t th e a g re e m e n t is c lea r a n d m ea su rab le, an d it
a d e q u a t e l y a n d s u f

f i c i e n t l y p r o v i d e d f

o rth e n e e d s o f

th e c h i l d
. I ti s f

a r f e t c h e d t o a s s u me that , dur i ng the f

orm at i on of

the agr eement , the parent s and t he tr i al courtw er e not
cons i der i ng the cos ti ncr eas es thatw oul d occuri n r ai s i ng a chi l d and the f l uctuat i ons that coul d occur i n t he par ent s ’ s al ar i es . B y s ett i ng a per cent age ba s i s atf i f t een pe r centof A ndy’ s A G I , the agr eemental l ot s room f orfl uctuat i on i n i ncome, and by s ett i ng a mi ni m um amount of

$36, 000 peryear , the agr eementr ef l ect s the mi ni m um amount the part i es agr eed
w as s uf f i ci entt o s uppor tthe chi l d. L as t l y, the cl aus e cl ear l y i s t i ed t o A ndy’ s earni ngs , and

### 8

dependi ng on A ndy’ s year l y i ncom e, the cl aus e coul d be es cal at i ng orde- es cal at i ng. C u rr e n tly , it is d e -e s c a la tin g , d u e to th e d e c re a s e in h is in c o m e . ¶18. U nder the s peci f i c f act s of thi s cas e, the agr eement i s bi ndi ng and comport s w i th the gui del i nes i n W

ing and T

edford . W

ing , 5 4 9 S o . 2 d a t 9 4 7 ; T edford , 437 So. 2d at419. N o n e th e les s, th is c a se is re m a n d e d fo r a d e ter m in a tio n o f w h e th e r a m a ter ial c h a n g e in
c ir c u m s ta n c e s e x is ts to w a rr a n t a m o d if ic a tio n o f t h e a g re e m e n t. I V . W het her t he chan cel l or com m i t t ed a m at he m at i c ale r r or w hen c a lc u la ti n g A n d y ’s in c o m e . ¶1 9 . T h e re c o rd re v e als th at th e ch an ce ll o r, w h il e refere n cing th e fac tors stip u late d in P i pkin v. D olan , 788 So. 2d 834 ( M i s s . C t . A pp. 2001) , cons i der ed the f ol l ow i ng i s s ues d u ri n g h is de term ination : ( 1 ) th e n ee d s o f th e c h il d in ac co rda n ce w ith the m o ther’s U n if o rm C h a n c e ry C o u rt R u le 8 .0 5 fin a n c ial s tate m e n t; (2 ) th e inc re a se in b o th p a re n ts’ e x p e n se s in
a c c o rd a n c e w ith th e ir R u le 8 .0 5 f in a n c ial s tate m e n ts; (3 ) in fla tio n ; (4 ) c h a n g e s in b o th part i es’ i ncomes, the di s par i ty betw een thei ri ncomes, and thei rearni ng capa ci t i es ; ( 5)
nece s s ary l i vi ng expens es of eac h party; ( 6) es t i m at ed amountof i ncome t axes f

oreac h party; ( 7) no f r ee us e of

any r es i dence ; and ( 8) thatthe part i es cr eat ed and a gr eed t o the s ett l ement
a g re e m e n t. ¶2 0. D ur i ng t he cha ncel l or ’ s rul i ng o n the p a r t i es ’ nece s s ary l i vi ng expens es , t he chanc el l or s t at ed thatA ndy’ s ne tmont hl y i ncome w as $12, 719. 96. T he cha ncel l orr eac hed the amountof

$12, 719. 96 by addi ng A ndy’ s $3, 200- per - m onth m or t gage e xpens e t o hi s net
m o n th ly in c o m e o f $ 8 ,5 1 9 .9 6 , w h ich ac tu a lly e q u a tes to $ 1 1 ,7 1 9 .9 6 . H o w e v e r, A n d y ’s R u le 8 .0 5 fin a n c ial s tate m e n t sh o w s A n d y ’s g ro ss m o n th ly inc o m e to b e $ 1 1 ,6 8 0 .7 3 . A n d y lists

### 9

deduct i ons of

f eder al i ncome t axes amount i ng t o $2, 920 . 18 perm onth and nonr ei m bur s ed b u sin e ss e x p e n se s a m o u n tin g to $ 4 8 1 .4 9 p e r m o n th , w hich t otal s $3 , 40 1. 67 in dedu ct i on s, l eavi ng A ndy w i th $8, 279. 06 i n netm onthl y i ncome. I ti s uncl earhow the cha ncel l or
r eac hed $8, 519. 96 i n ne tmont hl y i ncome, orw hy the chanc el l orthoughtthi s netam ount i ncl uded the deduc t i on of A ndy’ s m onthl y m or t gage. N everthel es s , i ti s cl earf r om the
re c o rd th a t th e c h a n c e llo r fo u n d th a t A n d y ’s m o n th ly m o rtg a g e p a y m e n t o f $ 3 ,2 0 0 p e r m o n th
w as an unnec es s ary l i vi ng expens e, cons i der i ng A ndy’ s year l y i nco m e h ad f al l en f r om $ 2 8 0 ,0 0 0 in 2 0 0 7 to $ 9 8 ,0 0 0 in 2 0 1 0 . ¶21 . T he cha ncel l or ’ s cal cul at i on of A ndy’s m onthly i nco m e w as i nco rr ectw hen compar ed to the R u le 8.05 fi n an cial st atem en t con tai n ed in the rec o rd. S ince the c h a n c e llo r’s det erm i nat i on thatno m at er i al change i n ci r cumst ance s had ar i s en dep ended i n parton A ndy’ s m onthl y i ncome, thi s j udgm enti s r ever s ed and the ca s e r emanded f ora r eca l cul at i on o f A n d y ’s m o n thly inc o m e in o rde r fo r th e tri al co u rtto co rrectl y d eterm ine w h ethe r a
m a te ri a l c h a n g e in c ir c u m s ta n c e s e x is ts w a rr a n tin g m o d if ic a tio n o f t h e a g re e m e n t. ¶ 2 2 . T o b e c le a r, w e a re r e v e rs in g th e c h a n c e llo r’s fin d in g o f n o m a ter ial c h a n g e in ci r cumst ance s a nd r emandi ng the cas e f ora ne w de t erm i nat i on of w hethera mat er i al change in c irc u m sta n c e s h a s o c c u rre d a n d , if so , fo r a n a p p ro p ri a te a d ju stm e n t to c h ild su p p o rt. T h e se d e ter m in a tio n s, in o u r v iew , first sh o u ld b e m a d e a t th e trial-c o u rt lev e l. CO NC L US I ON ¶23. T he chanc el l orerr ed i n cal cul at i ng A ndy’ s m onthl y i ncome dur i ng hi s det erm i nat i on of w hethera mat er i al change i n ci r cumst ance s exi s t ed. Fur ther , the chancel l or ’ s rul i ng err oneous l y i ndi cat ed thatthe part i es’ chi l d- s uppor tagr eementw as nonm odi f i abl e.

### 10

T he r e f or e , the j ud gmen t s o f

b oth the Courto f

Appe a l s a nd the tr i a l c ou r ta r e r e ve r s ed and this case is r em an d ed to the C h an ce ry C o u rto f L ee C o u n ty fo r a rec alcu lat ion o f A n d y ’s inc o m e an d for a de term ination of w h ethe r a m aterial ch an g e in circu m stan ce s ex ists to
re n d e r t h e c h ild -s u p p o rta g re e m e n t m o d if ia b le
. ¶ 2 4 . RE VE RS ED AND RE M ANDE D. W AL LE R, C. J . , DI CKI NS ON, P . J . , LAM AR, KI TC HENS , CHANDL ER , KI NG A N D C O L E M A N , JJ . , C O N C U R . R A N D O L P H , P . J. , C O N C U R S IN P A R T A N D IN RE S UL T W I TH S EP ARAT E W RI TT EN OP I NI ON.
R A N D O L P H , P R E S ID IN G JU S T IC E , C O N C U R R IN G IN P A R T A N D IN RES ULT: ¶25. T he m aj or i ty r ecog nizes t hat the ch ancell or er red by a dd i ng A nd y’s m or t gage p a y m e n t (an ex p e n se ) to h is n e t m o n th ly inc o m e o f $ 8 ,5 1 9 .9 6 , c a lcu latin g a n e t m o n th ly i ncome of

$12, 719. 96 ( w hi ch al s o i ncl udes a $1, 000 mat hemat i cal e rr or ) , a nd r emands the
c a se fo r th e c h a n c e llo r to re c a lcu la te a n d d e ter m in e “ w h e th e r a m a ter ial c h a n g e in circu m stan ce s e x ists to w arran t m o d if icati o n o f th e a g ree m en t. ” M aj. O p . ¶ 1 8 . H o w ev er, even i f t he cha ncel l or ’ s cal cul at i ons had bee n corr ect , he comm i t t ed mani f es terr ori n f

i ndi ng “thatno m at er i al change i n ci r cumst ance s had occ urr ed. ” See M aj
. O p. ¶ 2. ¶26. A s thi s C our t has s t at ed, “the change s i n ci r cumst ance s af f ect i ng the m odi f

i cat i on of a chi l d supportagr eementcoul d be thatof the f ather , the mot her , orthe chi l dr en. ” Mor r is v. Stacy , 641 So. 2d 1194, 1197 ( M i s s . 1994) ( ci t i ng McE achern v. McE achern , 605 S o. 2d 809, 813 ( M i s s . 19 92))
. W hi l e I do notcont end thatany f i nanci al change r equi r es
m o d if icati o n , the c h an ce ll o r co m m itt ed m an if est erro r i n fail ing to rec o g n ize tha t A n d y ’s pr eci pi t ous dr op of

$182, 000 i n i ncome ( $280, 000 i n 2007; $98, 000 i n 2010) r epr es ent ed aThis economic downturn also has bee n referred to a s the “GreatRecession.” 2 Ac co rdingto theUni ted

Stat es C en su s B ure au , f

rom 20 08 to 2 01 2, them edian ho us eh old 3 income in Mississi ppi was $38,882. Se e http:// quickfacts.census .gov/(la st v isited Feb. 4, 20 14 ). 

### 11 m aterial ch an g e in c ir cu m stan ce s in this ca se. T h ere i s no ev iden ce i n th e re co rd th at A n d y ’s dr as t i c dr op i n i ncome w as f or es eeabl e atthe t i m e of the agr eement , nori s ther e evi dence of the maj or i ty’ s as s um pt i ons as t o w hatthe part i es w er e cons i der i ng atthe t i m e of the
a g re e m e n t. See M aj
. O p. ¶10, 16. V ery fe w i n A m er i ca ( ort he w or l d) pre di ct ed a r ece s s i on so severe that our Presi den tcom pared i tt o the G reatD epress i on of the 1 9 3 0 s a n d 1 94 0s. 2 T h e re co rd is furthe r de v o id o f facts th at a m inim u m o f $3 , 0 0 0 -pe r-m o n th su p p o rtfor a 3
s even- year - ol d i s ne ces s ary orr eas onabl e, orthati ti s r el at ed t o the nee ds and expe ns es of E than. T he onl y r ecor d evi dence i s K athryn’ s R ul e 8. 05 f i nanci al st at ement( ent er ed pr i or t o the hea r i ng) , w hi ch l i s t s E than’ s expens es at$925 perm onth. ¶27 . A ll a g ree tha t t h e su p p o rto rde r w as m od i fi able. H ow ever, the fact s of this case compel m e t o concl ude thatthe cha ncel l orw as m ani f es t l y w rong i n det erm i ni ng thatno
m at er i al change i n ci r cumst ances exi s t ed, abs entr equi r ed pr oof that$36, 000 peryearw as
r el at ed t o the nee ds and expe ns es of the chi l d.