Opinion ID: 1774272
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: kathy palmer's request for specific findings of fact

Text: Pursuant to Miss.R.Civ.P. 52 and Uniform Chancery Court Rule 4.01, defendant Kathy Palmer has asked the Court to make the following specific findings of fact or conclusions of law: 1. How and when did Ricky Palmer's interest or right vest in the Mississippi properties? ANSWER: The interest vested as a result of the employee participation agreements. See paragraphs 30-33 above for the dates. However, Ricky made no investment nor he did he incur any obligation at that time. 2. What law applies to determine the nature of the funds used to acquire the Mississippi properties? ANSWER: Specific finding made above about source of funds, but the Court considers the question to be whether or not Mississippi law applies to title to properties located in Mississippi, and the Court finds that it does. 3. If Louisiana law applies, were any separate funds used to acquire the Mississippi properties? ANSWER: A hypothetical question (See answer to question 2); however, specific finding is made above about source of funds. 4. If Louisiana law applies, were any community funds used to acquire the Mississippi properties? ANSWER: A hypothetical question (See answer to question 2); however, specific finding is made above about source of funds. 5. If Louisiana law applies to determine the character of the funds used to acquire the Mississippi properties, which party has the burden of establishing that the funds were separate property? ANSWER: A hypothetical question (See answer to question 2); however, specific finding is made above about source of funds. 6. What burden of proof does the plaintiff have to establish his claim for removal of a cloud upon title to the Mississippi properties? ANSWER: This is not a request for a specific finding of fact. The facts in this case are essentially without dispute, but the plaintiff must generally prove his case by a preponderance of the evidence. As to certain facets of the case the burden of proof is greater. All facts found by the Court in this case are supported by evidence sufficient to meet any required burden of proof, whether it be a preponderance of the evidence; clear and convincing evidence; or beyond a reasonable doubt. 7. What are the specific elements of proof the defendant must present in order to establish a claim under a resulting trust, a constructive trust, and under the lump sum alimony legal theory? ANSWER: This sounds like a exam question for a law student. The Court knows of no rule that requires the Court to answer such interrogatories, and to expound on those theories, other than what is contained in the Court's Conclusions of Law. If the Court had a law clerk, it may consider assigning such a task to a law clerk to be answered, but under the circumstances the Court declines to write a treatise on this subject. A good discussion of trust theory can be read in Planters Bank & Trust Co. v. Sklar, 555 So.2d 1024 (Miss. 1990) and Allgood v. Allgood, 473 So.2d 416 (Miss. 1985), both of which are cited in defendant's brief. 8. Were any funds from Ricky's salary and Kathy's wages used to acquire the Mississippi properties? ANSWER: This has been specifically found above, but to answer again, Kathy never contributed anything from her wages to the business. Neither did any of the funds come from Ricky's salary. The principal source of funds in the Richard W. Palmer Business Account was the B.R.S. Partnership, along with some runs from the Texas and Louisiana properties. The money from salaries of both Ricky and Kathy went into the household account. 9. Were any funds from Ricky's and Kathy's community oil and gas properties used to acquire the Mississippi funds? ANSWER: Yes; funds derived from those sources. 10. Were any funds from the $1,500,000 line of credit used to acquire the Mississippi properties? ANSWER: No 11. Were any funds from Ricky's and Kathy's interest in Henderson Pipeline Company, Eastex Management Company, Whitehouse Pipeline Company, AU Investments, or 8400 Line Partnership used to acquire the Mississippi properties? ANSWER: Yes; funds derived from those sources. 12. Were any funds from the B.R.S. Partnership distributed to Ricky used to acquire the Mississippi properties? ANSWER: Yes; funds derived from those sources. 13. What contributions, if any, did Kathy make toward the acquisition of the Mississippi properties? ANSWER: None.