Opinion ID: 4515664
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Physical Allegations

Text: ¶30. Karrah last asserts that Richard was “physical with her during the marriage.”4 Specifically, Karrah asserts that Richard pinched her and slapped her arm and leg. But Karrah acknowledged that she failed to include the pinching and slapping incidents in her discovery responses. Nevertheless, Karrah testified that these incidents occurred one time, on the same day, in August 2017, during what Karrah describes as a seventeen-hour argument. ¶31. Karrah further asserts that Richard would physically pick her up and “force her into the bedroom” to sleep. Karrah testified that Richard liked for them to go to bed at the same time because he had a hard time sleeping without her. Karrah explained that “if [she] was sitting on the couch and [Richard] wanted [her] to go get in the bed to go to sleep, he would try to . . . pick [her] up and take [her] in there.” Karrah initially testified that this occurred “a few times.” But when her attorney asked how often this behavior occurred on a monthly basis, Karrah responded that it occurred every “four to six weeks maybe.” (Emphasis added.) ¶32. Karrah also testified that Richard would “move [her] out of his way.” She explained 4 Karrah does not allege physical abuse or that Richard “attempted to cause, or purposely, knowingly[,] or recklessly caused bodily injury to [her], or that [he] attempted by physical menace to put [her] in fear of imminent serious bodily harm.” Miss. Code Ann. § 93-5-1. 12 that if [they] were in the hall way and . . . if [they] were going to run into each other . . ., [Richard] would kind of scoot to one side; [she] would scoot to one side, and he would push [her] to the other side and want to go where [she] had gone instead of going around [her]. Karrah denied that this was Richard’s way of being playful. According to Karrah, this behavior started in February 2017, but progressively got worse. Karrah stated that by the end of their relationship, it occurred “probably weekly.” (Emphasis added.) ¶33. On cross-examination, Karrah testified that “[e]verything [between her and Richard] really got worse in August [2017].” Yet the record shows that Karrah accompanied Richard to North Carolina on three separate occasions between August and December 2017 to visit the church where Richard had interviewed and ultimately accepted a position as a pastor. Moreover, the record shows that Karrah intended to move with Richard to North Carolina. Karrah resigned from her nursing position at the hospital and accepted a job in North Carolina. Karrah and Richard looked at houses in North Carolina, and Richard signed a lease on a house that they picked out together. ¶34. Thus, despite Karrah’s allegations of spousal domestic abuse, she clearly planned to move with Richard to North Carolina. In fact, it was not until December 26, 2017, the day they were packing up their apartment to move, that Karrah decided not to go. Karrah testified regarding her decision to leave Richard as follows: [W]henever we were packing, he was, you know, constantly following me around, smothering me - because he did that all the time - daily almost - smother me. Touching me. Getting in my personal space. I couldn’t go in one room or the next. I couldn’t go outside. He would follow 13 me around trying to control me and watch every little move I was making, and he was doing that. And he was almost - he was either very firm or almost yelling at me about talking to my mom and my mom coming over, and he was trying to make me go run errands with him. I said, “We don’t have time. I just need a break from you right now. You know, you run errands; I’ll do this.” He wouldn’t take any of it, and he was so . . . ugly to me. And I was holding [Elizabeth], and that’s the moment when I remember feeling like, you know, if I left right now, I would have peace. And I didn’t leave right that moment; I waited but I knew in that moment, like, I wouldn’t have a guilty conscious [sic] for leaving at that time. ¶35. Karrah did not tell Richard that she was leaving him. Instead, she took Elizabeth and left with her mother. Richard did not see Elizabeth again until March 2018. ¶36. Additionally, despite Karrah’s testimony, the record shows that she posted various messages on social media expressing her love and admiration for Richard both before and during their fifteen-month marriage. Those social media posts include, I love this man so much. He is gentle and kind, even when I’m a little crazy. He’s the calm one with the sweetest heart and never gives up. I get to be his wife soon. [Posted August 20, 2016, approximately one month before Karrah and Richard were married] Happy Father’s Day to the best dad I could ever have and the best husband I could have for my baby. I love these two more and more every day. [Posted June 18, 2017, after the allegations of abandonment, and six months before Karrah left Richard] So grateful for this lunch date today. Thanks, Hubs. [Posted August 7, 2017, just four months before Karrah left Richard] ¶37. The opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part suggests that this case is comparable to Johnson v. Johnson, 281 So. 3d 70 (Miss. Ct. App. 2019). We respectfully disagree and find it distinguishable. In Johnson, the husband did not appear at trial and, 14 therefore, did not testify. Id. at 72. The trial testimony showed that the husband became angry and accused his wife of infidelity “over and over” again, he threatened to kill her and burn down their house, he broke a lot of furniture in the house and threatened to pull a cabinet down on his wife, and he cursed her. Id. at 72-73. Moreover, in Johnson, the testimony showed that the husband physically abused his wife on multiple occasions. Id. ¶38. Here, the chancellor concluded that Karrah failed to present adequate proof of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment. This Court agrees. Karrah’s evidence of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment, specifically, spousal domestic abuse, is nothing more than unkindness, rudeness, incompatibility, and/or want of affection. Miss. Code Ann. § 93-5-1. There was conflicting testimony regarding various allegations against Richard. Such testimony was considered by the chancellor. “This Court gives deference to a chancellor’s findings in regard to witness testimony, because the chancellor is able to observe and personally evaluate the witnesses’ testimony and the parties’ behavior.” Hoffman v. Hoffman, 270 So. 3d 1121, 1127 (Miss. Ct. App. 2018) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting McNeese v. McNeese, 119 So. 3d 264, 275 (Miss. 2013)).5 ¶39. Although Karrah alleges that Richard was critical and controlling, “[c]riticism and 5 The opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part suggests that the chancellor should have conducted a subjective inquiry regarding Karrah’s feelings. But the record shows that the chancellor considered the testimony, pleadings, and exhibits admitted at trial. Simply because the chancellor dismissed Karrah’s complaint for divorce does not mean he did not consider Karrah’s feelings. The opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part further states that “the majority does not consider how Richard Wangler’s conduct made Karrah Wangler feel.” CIPDIP Op. ¶ 47. But this Court considered the record and transcript, which include and discuss Karrah’s testimony and feelings regarding Richard’s alleged conduct. 15 controlling behavior [do] ‘not fulfill the requirements of a divorce on the grounds of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment.’” Osborne, 202 So. 3d at 641 (quoting Morris v. Morris, 804 So. 2d 1025, 1032 (Miss. 2002)). While odd and even disrespectful at times, Richard’s behavior does not amount to cruel and inhuman treatment. Indeed, Karrah’s and Richard’s immaturity, their lack of communication, their frivolous quarreling, their incompatibility, and their inability to manage conflict do not amount to cruel and inhuman treatment. ¶40. “A marriage may become unpleasant and argumentative, but not rise to the level of being so unnatural and infamous as to warrant the grant of divorce on the ground of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment.” Osborne, 202 So. 3d at 642 (citing Killen v. Killen, 54 So. 3d 869, 873 (Miss. Ct. App. 2010)). While Karrah and Richard may have an unhappy, incompatible marriage, Karrah has failed to prove that Richard’s behavior rises to the level of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment. Accordingly, the chancellor’s judgment is affirmed.