Opinion ID: 1774484
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Marital Distribution or Lump Sum Alimony

Text: In his bench ruling the chancellor found that JoAnn was entitled to a marital distribution and/or lump sum alimony. However, he was unable to set amounts on either due to the fact that Heigle Farms, Roger's principal asset, was in bankruptcy. The chancellor's finding was erroneous. In the case of property settlement and lump sum alimony, the court's decision must hinge on the value of the marital estate, or the spouses' separate estates. Ferguson v. Ferguson, 639 So.2d 921, 928-29 (Miss. 1994); Cheatham v. Cheatham, 537 So.2d 435, 438 (Miss. 1988). In Ferguson, the Court stated: Property division should be based upon a determination of the fair market value of the assets, and these valuations should be the initial step before determining division. 639 So.2d at 929. In the instant case, that information was not before the court when it made its determination due to the bankruptcy proceedings involving Heigle Farms. The value of Roger's partnership interest could be several thousand dollars, or it might be totally worthless. That being the case, the court's decision to grant JoAnn a property settlement and/or lump sum alimony was premature, and we reverse on this issue.