Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101

Section 43-19-101 provides guidelines for initial child support awards but does not address automatic adjustments of future support.

Wing v. Wing · filed 1989-09-20

In Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Supp. 1989), effective October 1, 1989, the Mississippi Legislature has enacted legislation, setting forward guidelines for child support initial awards; however, these guidelines do not address automatic adjustment of future support.

The child support guidelines do not themselves establish a material change in circumstances warranting modification of an existing support decree.

Gregg v. Montgomery · filed 1991-10-16

Donnie argues that the enactment of the child support award guidelines in Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Supp. 1990) is the "material change in circumstances" that warrants a modification of the decree. ... There was no error in the chancellor's findings that "no material change in circumstances" justifying modification.

Section 43-19-101 does not require an agreed lump sum child support award to be converted to a per-child amount and reduced to the guideline amount merely because one child moves in with the paying parent.

Lack v. Nash · filed 1999-06-29

Under the totality of the circumstances, where the original agreement set forth a lump sum payment not designated per child, Nash must continue to pay the necessary expense of the car note for Amanda's car, the extra cost to Lack for Amanda living with him is nominal, and Lack can now claim Amanda as a dependent, we hold that the chancellor was not manifestly in error in refusing to change Lack's global child support payment to a per child scale and reduce his payments to conform with Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Supp.1998).

Section 43-19-101 presumptively sets support for one child at 14% of adjusted gross income from all potential sources after specified mandatory deductions.

Stroud v. Stroud · filed 2000-05-09

Absent a showing on inapplicability, the statutory amount of child support for one child is 14% of the AGI. ... The AGI is defined as the gross income "from all potential sources" minus certain legally mandated deductions for taxes, social security contributions and involuntary retirement and disability contributions.

Section 43-19-101 provides child support guidelines that a chancellor may consider but that do not control the award.

Thurman v. Thurman · filed 1990-03-28

The guidelines for child support awards as now set out in Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Supp. 1989) must not control the Chancellor's award of child support.

Section 43-19-101’s child support percentage is a guideline; the chancellor must consider the child’s support needs when setting the award.

Jellenc v. Jellenc · filed 1990-09-19

Chapter 439, Laws 1989, Miss. Code Ann. §§ 43-19-101, -103 (Supp. 1989) codified the above guidelines. ... The chancellor should have considered the amount of money which reasonably should be required in child support from each parent, taking into account that Jellenc is the custodial parent and providing a home for the child. In the recent case of Thurman v. Thurman, 559 So.2d 1014 (1990), we held that the 1989 statute in child support cases must of necessity be only a guideline, "Certainly the guidelines are relevant and may be considered by a chancellor as an aid, but the guidelines may not determine the specific need or the specific support required."

Section 43-19-101(1) sets a rebuttable 14% child support guideline for one child that aids the chancellor but does not dictate the award.

Smith v. Smith · filed 1991-08-28(1)

Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) provides that where one child is due support, the percentage of adjusted gross income that should be awarded for support is 14%. This guideline "shall be a rebuttable presumption" in cases involving child support. As to the percentage guidelines provided in § 43-19-101, we found in Thurman v. Thurman, 559 So.2d 1014, 1018 (Miss. 1990), that "the guidelines [of § 43-19-101] are relevant and may be considered by a chancellor as an aid, but the guidelines may not determine the specific need or the specific support required." ... The award of $325.00 may be high, but does not constitute reversible error, especially when considering all the in-kind services which Douglas Smith has performed, and continues to perform, for Eric.

Section 43-19-101 provides child support guidelines, but its figures do not determine the specific amount of support required.

Gillespie v. Gillespie · filed 1992-02-12

Ray contends that under the child support award guidelines of Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101, the award should only have been $134.25. We have stated that the statute is only a guideline and may not determine the specific need or the specific support required. We repeat that statement here.

Section 43-19-101 supplied a fourteen percent guideline for one child, but the guideline did not control the chancellor's support award.

Hammett v. Woods · filed 1992-05-27

Effective April 4, 1990, one month before the Chancellor's May 14, 1990, decision was rendered, the guidelines were amended to provide for an award of fourteen percent for a single child. Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Supp. 1990). We have, however, held that the Child Support Guidelines are nothing more than suggested guidelines and "must not control the Chancellor's award of child support." Thurman v. Thurman, 559 So.2d 1014, 1017 (Miss. 1990). Using this figure as a measuring stick, however, and applying it to Hammett's 1989 adjusted gross income of $50,000, we calculate a monthly figure of approximately $583.33, well below the Chancellor's award but still in excess of Bret's actual needs.

For five or more children, Section 43-19-101 calls for child support equal to 26% of adjusted gross income, but the guideline amount does not control the chancellor's award.

McEachern v. McEachern · filed 1992-08-12

We must now look to the guidelines provided by Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Supp. 1991). For five or more children, the guidelines call for twenty-six percent (26%) of the adjusted gross income to be awarded for child support. In Raymond's case that is approximately $398.00 a month. However, the guidelines may not determine the specific amount of support required. This is a job for the chancellor, who has special knowledge of the actual circumstances.

Section 43-19-101 provides child support guidelines that help courts assess an award but do not bind the chancellor.

Dunn v. Dunn · filed 1992-12-10

Although not binding, the guidelines set out in § 43-19-101 are helpful in determining whether the chancellor was manifestly in error in his finding of fact.

Section 43-19-101 requires specific findings to justify departing from the child support guidelines and a written finding on whether the guidelines are reasonable when adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000.

Knutson v. Knutson · filed 1993-04-01(2), (4)

Although the chancellor made some findings relative to the award of child support, and although the chancellor was not bound to follow the child support guidelines, the statute and case law are clear that he should have begun with the child support guidelines and then, if necessary, increased the amount of the award, showing specific reasons for the increase.

Section 43-19-101's child support guidelines do not mandate a specific support amount; the chancellor determines support from the facts and the parties' circumstances, especially the child's.

Patricia L. Bruce Krupica v. Bruce · filed 1993-08-26

The clause granting additional support based on "bonus pay" appears to be intended to conform with the twenty percent figure suggested by the Child Support Guidelines in Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Rev. 1993). These guidelines are not mandatory as to the specific need or support required; rather, the chancellor is to make the determination based on the facts he hears, the witnesses he views, and the circumstances of the parties, especially the child.

Section 43-19-101 requires findings supporting a child support award above the guideline amount; an unsupported award may be reversed and remanded.

Dufour v. Dufour · filed 1994-01-27(4)

In the case sub judice, we must consider the effect and the resulting requirements caused by Section 43-19-101(4). ... Based on the fact that the child support award is greater than the amount recommended by the guidelines and not supported by the record or the chancellor's findings, the child support award should be reversed and remanded.

Section 43-19-101 provides child support guidelines that aid the chancellor and can be rebutted by a contrary finding.

McEwen v. McEwen · filed 1994-02-10

Examining the guidelines set forth in Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Supp. 1992), Mr. McEwen would be required to pay a total of approximately $305.00 per month for both children (20% of adjusted gross income). We have stated many times that these guidelines are only an aid to the chancellor and will be effectively rebutted by a finding contrary thereto.

Section 43-19-101 creates a rebuttable presumption that its child support guidelines are appropriate.

Chamblee v. Chamblee · filed 1994-06-02

Sheila simply did not put forth enough evidence to overcome the rebuttable presumption of appropriateness that the statute creates.

Section 43-19-101(2) allows a court to depart from the child support guidelines when it makes written or on-record findings that applying them would be unjust or inappropriate.

Grogan v. Grogan · filed 1994-06-09(2)

The chancellor followed the required method of rebutting this statutory presumption, and committed no error in departing from these guidelines.

Section 43-19-101 sets a presumptive child support guideline of 22% of adjusted gross income for three children; the court must determine the parent's income when applying it.

Brennan v. Brennan · filed 1994-06-23

Finally, if James' income is as it was in 1990, 1991 and the first half of 1992, the award of $1,000.00 per month in child support is well below the guidelines set forth in § 43-19-101 (Supp. 1993). Absent from the record of the case sub judice, is any type of evidence to overcome the presumption set forth in the guidelines.

Section 43-19-101's child support guideline is an aid to the chancellor, who determines support in light of the child's circumstances.

Ferguson v. Ferguson · filed 1994-07-07

Moreover, Billy submits the amount of child support awarded to Linda was in excess of 14% of his adjusted gross income, well above the statutory guidelines for one child set forth in Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Supp. 1993). In Smith, this Court addressed a similar complaint: While the statutory guidelines are relevant and may be considered by a chancellor as an aid in determining child support awards, we have held that the specific need or support required is to be determined by a chancellor "at a time real, on a scene certain, and with a knowledge special to the actual circumstances and to the individual child or children." ... Accordingly, we find the Chancellor was not manifestly in error and did not abuse his judicial discretion in awarding child support.

Section 43-19-101 sets a 14 percent child support guideline for one child, but the guideline does not bind chancellors.

Anderson v. John Anderson, Sr. · filed 1994-08-04

Therefore, applying the Child Support Guidelines(2) for one child of 14 percent, John should have to pay $700 per month. The chancellor's reduction of $200 per month still required John to pay $800 per month. This Court has held that the Child Support Guidelines are nothing more than suggested guidelines and should not bind chancellors in awarding child support.

Section 43-19-101 sets a 20% adjusted gross income guideline for supporting two children; a higher award requires written findings explaining why the guideline is inappropriate.

Johnson v. Johnson · filed 1994-12-21(1)

The child support award guidelines found in Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) (1972) provide that where, as here, there are two (2) children who are due support, the percentage of adjusted gross income suggested for their support is 20%. ... However, a chancellor can depart from the guidelines with written findings of their inappropriateness. McEachern v. McEachern, 605 So.2d 809, 813-14 (Miss. 1992). Without a written justification, such a departure is error by law and reversible.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires child support guidelines to apply unless the court makes a written or specific finding on the record that applying them would be unjust or inappropriate.

Seitz v. Seitz · filed 1995-06-08(2)

The statutory language specifically states that the guidelines shall apply unless the judicial body awarding the award makes a written or specific finding on the record that the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate under Section 43-19-103 of the Code.

Section 43-19-101(1) provides a child support guideline of 20 percent of adjusted gross income for two children.

Jackson v. Jackson · filed 1995-11-16(1)

According to Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (1) the percentage of adjusted gross income that should be awarded for support of two children due support is 20 percent. Applying the 20% guideline to Daryl's monthly adjusted income equals $484 per month. Daryl does not offer any support for his argument, nor does he contend the chancellor's finding of his monthly adjusted income of $2,420 to be erroneous. Therefore, the chancellor correctly set the amount of child support payable at $485.

Section 43-19-101 provides child support guidelines, but the suggested percentage does not determine the required support without considering the child’s needs and the parties’ circumstances.

Bruce v. Bruce · filed 1996-09-05

The clause granting additional support based on "bonus pay" appears to be intended to conform with the twenty percent figure suggested by the Child Support Guidelines in Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Rev. 1993). These guidelines are not mandatory as to the specific need or support required; rather, the chancellor is to make the determination based on the facts he hears, the witnesses he views, and the circumstances of the parties, especially the child.

Section 43-19-101 provides child support guidelines that can permit an award even when it affects the paying parent's living standard.

Labella v. Labella · filed 1997-04-03

Although this may impact his living style, the amount is within the guidelines prescribed by Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Supp. 1998), and the children are the focal concern here.

Section 43-19-101 provides a 14 percent child support guideline for one child, but the guideline does not bind chancellors.

Anderson v. Anderson · filed 1997-04-10

Therefore, applying the Child Support Guidelines [2] for one child of 14 percent, John should have to pay $700 per month. The chancellor's reduction of $200 per month still required John to pay $800 per month. This Court has held that the Child Support Guidelines are nothing more than suggested guidelines and should not bind chancellors in awarding child support.

For three children, the section presumes child support of 22% of the paying parent's adjusted gross income; the court may use income supported by the record when reported income is unreliable.

Richard J. Clark, Jr. v. Clark · filed 1998-02-11(1)

In fact, based solely on the testimony regarding the payment of Richard's employees, it was evident that Richard made more than he said he did (or he could not have paid his workers). Thus, applying the statutory guidelines to Richard's reported income would not be accurate in this case.

Section 43-19-101 supplies child support guidelines under which an amount may be upheld even if it affects the paying parent's living style.

Labella v. Labella · filed 1998-09-24

Although this may impact his living style, the amount is within the guidelines proscribed by Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Supp.1998), and the children are the focal concern here.

Section 43-19-101(1) presumes child support of 14% of the supporting parent's gross income for one child, including after an older child reaches majority.

Selman v. Selman · filed 1998-10-08(1)

Thus, even after Tony reached the age of majority, fourteen percent (14%) of A.W's gross income would still be proper under Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101.

Section 43-19-101 sets a 14% child support guideline for one child, requires a written or specific finding to depart from it, and requires a written reasonableness finding when a parent’s adjusted gross income is below $5,000 or above $50,000.

Delozier v. Delozier · filed 1998-12-18(1), (2), (4)

According to the statute, the non-custodial parent of one child should pay 14% of his or her adjusted gross income in child support unless the chancellor makes a written or specific finding that the application of the guidelines would be inappropriate. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1), (2) (Rev.1993). Furthermore, in cases in which the parent earns less than $5,000 or more than $50,000 in adjusted gross income, the chancellor must make a written finding as to whether or not the guidelines are reasonable. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(4) (Rev.1993). ... Thus, we are faced with no other alternative but to reverse the chancellor’s child support award and remand for a determination of the appropriate amount of child support to be awarded pursuant to Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Rev. 1993).

Section 43-19-101(1) sets a child support guideline of 20% of adjusted gross income for two children.

Crist v. Lawrence · filed 1999-02-09(1)

The statutory guidelines for support of two children would be 20% of adjusted gross income or approximately $320 per month at the time of the divorce. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) (Supp. 1998). Mr. Crist's obligation of $800 per month was half of his adjusted gross income.

Section 43-19-101(1) provides a rebuttable presumption of child support equal to fourteen percent of the supporting parent's gross income when one child is due support.

Selman v. Selman · filed 1997-01-30(1)

Thus, even after Tony reached the age of majority, fourteen percent (14%) of A.W's gross income would still be proper under Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101.

Section 43-19-101(1) generally sets child support for two children at twenty percent of the noncustodial parent's adjusted gross income.

Mixon v. Mixon · filed 1998-12-18(1)

As a general rule, non-custodial parents are required to give twenty percent of their adjusted gross income for the support of two children. See Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) (Supp.1998). ... Applying the statutory formula, we find that the chancellor's calculations comply with the scheme set forth in the statute.

Section 43-19-101 creates a rebuttable presumption that the guideline percentage produces an appropriate child support amount.

Luckett v. Luckett · filed 1998-12-30(2)

The guidelines delineated in § 43-19-101 create a rebuttable presumption as to the appropriateness of such a computation.

Section 43-19-101 sets child support for two children at twenty percent of the paying parent's adjusted gross income.

Burnham-Steptoe v. Steptoe · filed 1999-09-14

After calculating Mr. Steptoe's annual adjusted gross income of $33,425, the chancellor required Mr. Steptoe to pay twenty percent (20%) of that income as child support for the two children, pursuant to the guidelines delineated in Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Supp.1998). ... Discerning that the trial court's determination was neither manifestly wrong nor clearly erroneous and that the correct legal standard was applied, we affirm the award of child support in the amount of $557 per month.

Section 43-19-101(1) sets the child support guideline for three children at twenty-two percent of the non-custodial parent's income.

Moore v. Moore · filed 2000-03-21(1)

The statutory guidelines for the support of three children is twenty-two percent of the non-custodial parent's income. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) (Rev.1993). ... We decline to disturb his findings.

Section 43-19-101 creates a rebuttable presumption that support for two children is twenty percent of the noncustodial parent's adjusted gross income.

Roberts v. Roberts · filed 2005-09-13(1)

This State in Mississippi Code Annotated § 43-19-101 (Supp.2003) has established child support award guidelines, which create a "rebuttable presumption" of correctness. Under these guidelines, the non-custodial parent is required to pay twenty percent of his adjusted gross income for the support of two children. See Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) (Supp.2003). ... The chancellor adhered to the guidelines of Mississippi Code Annotated § 43-19-101, and this Court finds no error in that action.

Section 43-19-101(1) presumptively sets child support for two children at twenty percent of the noncustodial parent’s adjusted gross income when annual adjusted gross income is between $10,000 and $100,000.

Plummer v. Plummer · filed 2017-07-18(1)

The Mississippi statutory child-support guidelines provide that noncustodial parents should pay twenty percent of their AGI for two children. Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) (Rev. 2015). The guidelines are presumptively correct for persons with an adjusted yearly gross income between $10,000 and $100,000. Id. ... Upon review of the record, we cannot say that the chancellor erred in calculating James’s new child-support obligation.

Section 43-19-101(1) presumes that support for one child is fourteen percent of the paying parent’s adjusted gross income; a calculation based on an incorrect income figure must be reversed.

Vassar v. Vassar · filed 2017-10-17(1)

There is a rebuttable presumption that a parent should pay fourteen percent of his or her adjusted gross income for the support of one child. ... Because the chancellor’s calculation of child support was based on a “clear mathematical error,” we must reverse.

Section 43-19-101 sets the guideline for two children at twenty percent of adjusted gross income and requires a written reasonableness finding when income exceeds $50,000.

Suber v. Suber · filed 2006-03-21

The guidelines for two children is twenty percent of the adjusted gross income; however, if the income is more than $50,000 the court shall make a written finding in the record as to whether this amount is reasonable. Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Rev.2004).

Section 43-19-101(1) creates a rebuttable presumption that a noncustodial parent will pay fourteen percent of adjusted gross income to support one child.

Forrest v. McCoy · filed 2006-11-07(1)

Thus it "shall be a rebuttable presumption" that McCoy, as the non-custodial parent, shall provide his child with fourteen percent of his adjusted gross income. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) (Rev.2004).

Section 43-19-101(1) sets the child support guideline for four children at 24% of adjusted gross income.

Brooks v. Brooks · filed 2011-12-13(1)

Applying the statutorily recommended amount of 24% for four children to Brandon’s adjusted gross income of $3,686.84, the correct amount of child support is $885.

Section 43-19-101(3)(b) sets child support for one child at 14% of the noncustodial parent’s adjusted gross income.

Bell v. Bell · filed 2016-12-06(3)(b)

Under the applicable Mississippi statute, a noncustodial parent of one child should pay 14% of his or her adjusted gross income for child support.

For one child, Section 43-19-101(1) sets guideline support at fourteen percent of the noncustodial parent’s adjusted gross income.

Burgess v. Williamson · filed 2018-10-02(1)

However, the chancery court did not deviate from the guidelines; rather, the court followed the guidelines by ordering Burgess to pay fourteen percent of her adjusted gross income.

Section 43-19-101(1) creates a rebuttable presumption that child support for one child is fourteen percent of the payor’s adjusted gross income.

Stuckey v. Stuckey · filed 2022-06-21(1)

The chancellor ordered Haley to pay $613.50, fourteen percent of her adjusted gross income as reflected by her Rule 8.05 financial statement and in accordance with the statutory guidelines. See Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) (Rev. 2015) (establishing a rebuttable presumption that fourteen percent of the payor’s adjusted gross income should be awarded for the support of one child).

Section 43-19-101(3)(b) sets the child support guideline for one child at 14% of the noncustodial parent’s adjusted gross income.

Weatherly v. Weatherly · filed 2024-05-07(3)(b)

Under our law, a non-custodial parent of one child should pay 14% of his or her adjusted gross income for child support. Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(3)(b) (Rev. 2015). ... Here, the chancellor’s written and specific finding comports with the requirements under our law and therefore we find no error.

Section 43-19-101(1) creates a rebuttable presumption that child support for three children is twenty-two percent of the payor’s adjusted gross income.

Christina Lynn Sullivan Leblanc v. William Clarence Leblanc, III · filed 2018-10-23(1)

Thus, under the statutory guidelines, there is a presumption that Billy should pay child support equal to twenty-two percent of his adjusted gross income of approximately $7,138.39. Therefore, we reverse and remand for the court to recalculate child support based on the applicable statutory percentage and Billy’s true adjusted gross income.

Section 43-19-101(1) sets child support for two children at twenty percent of the noncustodial parent’s adjusted gross income.

Doe v. Doe · filed 2021-11-09(1)

The Mississippi statutory child-support guidelines provide that noncustodial parents should pay twenty percent of their adjusted gross income for two children.

For two children, the section creates a rebuttable presumption that child support should equal twenty percent of the paying parent’s adjusted gross income.

Wooten v. Ashley L. Simmons Wooten · filed 2022-01-18(1)

See Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) (Rev. 2021) (establishing a rebuttable presumption that twenty percent of the payor’s adjusted gross income should be awarded for the support of two children). We find that the chancellor did not abuse her discretion by setting child support based on the statutory guidelines.

Section 43-19-101(1) does not require a chancellor to halve each parent’s guideline support amount before calculating the difference when the parents share physical custody equally.

Franks v. Franks · filed 2024-09-17(1)

However, the decision in Rayner did not establish a per se rule that child support in joint custody cases must be established this way.

Section 43-19-101(4) requires a written finding on the applicability of the child support guidelines when the paying spouse’s adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000.

Ashford v. Ashford · filed 1993-08-09(4)

Furthermore, Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19- 101(4) requires that the chancellor make a written finding in the record as to the applicability of the guidelines where the adjusted gross income of the paying spouse is more than $50,000. The chancellor in this case made no written findings regarding the application of the statutory guidelines. For this reason, this case is remanded on cross-appeal for a determination of whether the presumption set forth in the statute has been rebutted in this case.

Section 43-19-101 requires a sufficient written finding when a chancellor awards no child support instead of following the guidelines.

Hopkins v. Hopkins · filed 1995-03-27(2)

On remand, either the child support guidelines set forth in Section 43- 19-101(1) of the Mississippi Code of 1972 should be adhered to, or a sufficient written finding pursuant to Section 43-19-101(2) of the Mississippi Code of 1972 should be given.

Section 43-19-101 requires a written or on-the-record finding that applying the child support guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate before a court departs from them.

Draper v. Draper · filed 1995-07-20(2)

They apply unless there is a "written finding or specific finding on the record that the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate in a particular case as determined under the criteria specified in Section 43-19-103." Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2). ... Because the chancellor failed to make a specific finding on the record that the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate, we find that the $350 a month award for child support was manifestly erroneous.

Section 43-19-101 requires a specific finding on the record that applying the child support guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate before a court departs from them.

Clausel v. Clausel · filed 1996-12-27(2)

The chancellor failed to make a specific finding on the record as to why the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate and, thus, the $750.00 a month award for child support was manifestly erroneous.

Section 43-19-101(2) permits a child support award above the guidelines when findings on the record justify the variance.

Johnston v. Johnston · filed 1997-01-09(2)

Thus, we find that the chancellor made written findings on the record sufficient to rebut the presumption that the guidelines are appropriate and to justify the slight variance from the guidelines. Therefore, finding no abuse in the chancellor's discretion, we hold that the chancellor did not err, and this issue is without merit.

Section 43-19-101 permits a departure from the child support guidelines when the court makes a written or on-the-record finding explaining why they are unjust or inappropriate.

James P. Gray, Sr. v. Gray · filed 1997-06-23(2)

If the chancellor found the application of the guidelines to be unjust or inappropriate, a deviation is permitted if it is accompanied by a written finding or specific finding on the record detailing the reasons for said deviation.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a chancellor who departs from the child support guidelines to make specific findings that applying them would be unjust or inappropriate.

Wallace v. Ann Laney Jeni Wallace Bond · filed 1997-10-30(2)

If a chancellor decides not to apply the guidelines of § 43-19-101, a written statement regarding the findings of fact is necessary to establish that applying the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate. The chancellor's passing mention of the guidelines can hardly be said to constitute the kind of analysis required by § 43-19-101.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a chancellor who departs from the child support guidelines to make a written or on-record finding that applying them would be unjust or inappropriate.

Leslie Kay King Brocato v. Brocato · filed 1997-12-11(2)

Furthermore, in regards to the failure to provide child support for Leslie, this Court remands this case for the chancellor to specifically reference, in writing, why the statutory guidelines were inappropriate or unjust, as required by Miss. Code Ann. § 43- 19-101(2).

Section 43-19-101 requires on-the-record findings when a child support award departs from the guidelines.

Knutson v. Knutson · filed 1997-12-18(2), (4)

We find that in awarding child support, the chancellor failed to follow the dictates of sections 43-19-101(2) and 43-19-101(4), which mandate an on-the-record finding where child support is awarded below or in excess of the child support award guidelines.

Section 43-19-101 requires a chancellor who departs from the child support guidelines to make written findings that refer to the guidelines and explain the departure.

Rakestraw v. Rakestraw · filed 1998-04-21(2), (4)

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a "written finding or specific finding on the record that the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate... as determined under the criteria specified in § 43-19-103" in order to effectively overcome the statutory presumption. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2). Similarly, § 43-19-101(4) reads in part, "the court shall make a written finding in the record as to whether or not the application of the guidelines established" is reasonable. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(4). (emphasis added). Our supreme court has held that these provisions, operating in conjunction, at a minimum require some written reference to the guidelines being bypassed and some explanation as to why. Knutson v. Knutson, 704 So.2d 1331, 1334 (Miss.1997). See also Johnson v. Johnson, 650 So.2d 1281 (Miss. 1995) (chancellor must use statutory percentages as baseline). Clearly, no such language appears in the Opinion and Judgment issued below. We therefore must reverse and remand on this issue.

Section 43-19-101 requires a written or on-record finding that applying the child support guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate before departing from them.

Clausel v. Clausel · filed 1998-06-04(2)

The chancellor failed to make a specific finding on the record as to why the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate and, thus, the $750.00 a month award for child support was manifestly erroneous.

Section 43-19-101(2) permits a child support award above the guideline amount when findings on the record justify the variance.

Johnston v. Johnston · filed 1998-09-24(2)

Thus, we find that the chancellor made written findings on the record sufficient to rebut the presumption that the guidelines are appropriate and to justify the slight variance from the guidelines.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires written findings of fact to justify a child support award that departs from the statutory guidelines.

Mississippi Department of Human Services v. Melvin L. Fillingane, Jr. · filed 1998-10-15(2)

DHS correctly notes that the Chancellor's award of $200/month in child support was substantially below the statutory guidelines, and the Chancellor made no written findings of fact in support of his ruling, contrary to the express requirements of law. See: Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2); Knutson v. Knutson, 704 So.2d 1331 (Miss. 1997). ... This Court concludes that, on remand, the Chancellor should either follow the statutory guidelines or justify his failure to do so with written findings of fact, as required by law.

Section 43-19-101 permits a child support award outside the guidelines only when the chancellor makes specific written findings explaining why applying them would be unjust.

Osborn v. Osborn · filed 1998-12-18(1)

While a chancellor may deviate from the guidelines of § 43-19-101, such deviation must be justified by specific written findings. The chancellor must apply the guidelines to make the determination that their application would be unjust.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a chancellor who departs from the child support guidelines to make a written or on-record finding explaining why applying them would be unjust or inappropriate.

Brocato v. Brocato · filed 1999-01-21(2)

Furthermore, in regards to the failure to provide child support for Leslie, this Court remands this case for the chancellor to specifically reference, in writing, why the statutory guidelines were inappropriate or unjust, as required by Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2).

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a specific finding to justify departing from the child support guidelines; a missing finding requires remand when a party challenges the amount awarded.

McGehee v. Upchurch · filed 1999-02-09(2)

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a "written finding or specific finding on the record that the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate ... as determined under the criteria specified in § 43-19-103" in order to effectively overcome the statutory presumption. ... When a chancellor makes a ruling without specific findings of fact and a party raises the issue of the amount of child support awarded, this Court will send the issue back to the lower court for the mandatory specific findings of fact as to why the chancellor deviated from the guidelines.

Section 43-19-101(4) requires a chancellor to consider the child support guidelines and explain the amount of support ordered.

Collins v. Collins · filed 1997-06-30(4)

The chancellor did set out detailed written findings in light of the statutory guidelines. He made reference to the guidelines and explained his reasoning in determining the correct amount of child support and how the total amount ordered is close to the guideline set by the legislature. This is what the statute as well as case law requires the chancellor to do. See Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(4) (1993) and Knutson v. Knutson, 704 So. 2d 1331, 1335 (Miss. 1997).

Section 43-19-101 allows child support to be based on reasonable earning capacity when temporary financial reverses make current income unreliable, if the chancellor states the basis for deviating from the guidelines on the record.

White v. White · filed 1998-10-13(1)

We hereby hold that where temporary financial reverses create an unreliable measure for an award of child support, the chancellor may in his discretion predicate an award on reasonable earning capacity. ... A chancellor's deviation from the Mississippi child support guidelines must be supported by an on the record finding that said deviation is warranted. Rakestraw v. Rakestraw, 96-CA-0118-COA (¶ 13) (Miss. 1998); Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) (Rev. 1993).

Section 43-19-101(4) requires the chancellor to make detailed written findings explaining the child support award in light of the statutory guidelines.

Collins v. Collins · filed 1998-10-22(4)

The chancellor did set out detailed written findings in light of the statutory guidelines. He made reference to the guidelines and explained his reasoning in determining the correct amount of child support and how the total amount ordered is close to the guideline set by the legislature. This is what the statute as well as case law requires the chancellor to do. See Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(4) (1993) and Knutson v. Knutson, 704 So.2d 1331, 1335 (Miss. 1997).

When adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000, subsection (4) requires a written finding on whether applying the child support guidelines is reasonable.

Stanford v. Stanford · filed 1999-02-23(4)

We are satisfied that the chancellor has now complied with § 43-19-101(4) and has not abused his discretion in so doing; therefore, we affirm the award of child support in the amount of 20% of Thomas's adjusted gross income.

When an obligor's annual income subject to child support calculations exceeds $50,000, Section 43-19-101(4) requires the chancellor to determine separately whether strict application of the guidelines is reasonable.

Southerland v. Susan Diane Shoemaker Southerland · filed 2000-02-10(4)

There is the additional consideration that, when the obligor's income subject to child support calculations exceeds $50,000 annually, the chancellor must make a separate determination as to whether a strict application of the guidelines is reasonable.

Section 43-19-101 requires a specific on-the-record finding to support a child support award that departs from its guidelines.

Grant v. Grant · filed 1999-03-19(2)

When a chancellor chooses not to follow the guidelines, this Court has enforced the statutory requirement that the chancellor make an on-the-record determination that the guidelines do not apply. Clausel v. Clausel, 714 So. 2d 265, 267 (Miss. 1998). In the present case, the chancellor did make an on-the-record finding to support his slight deviation from the statutory guidelines.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a chancellor to explain any deviation from the child support guidelines on the record.

Stinson v. Stinson · filed 1999-04-20(2)

A deviation from the guidelines must be explained on the record by the chancellor. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2) (Supp.1998).

Section 43-19-101 permits a reasonable variation from its child support guidelines, but the guidelines must remain a reference point for the award.

Kilgore v. Fuller · filed 1999-05-04(1)

If a chancellor varies support from the guidelines, it must still be a reasonable variation. We have found no authority for permitting the support award to be totally unanchored from the guidelines. There can be a deviation, but not a total disregarding of them.

A child support award may depart from the guidelines if the court finds in writing or on the record why applying them would be unjust or inappropriate.

Gray v. Gray · filed 1999-07-22(2)

If the chancellor found the application of the guidelines to be unjust or inappropriate, a deviation is permitted if it is accompanied by a written finding or specific finding on the record detailing the reasons for said deviation. It appears that the chancellor was skeptical of James' adjusted income, and rightfully so, nevertheless, he failed to specifically determine on the record the adjusted gross income. Without having the benefit of the chancellor's findings of fact, it cannot be said that the guidelines were either followed or not followed. Therefore, we vacate the judgment in part as to the award of child support, and we remand so that the chancellor may reconsider this issue and provide specific findings of fact to support his award.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a written or specific on-record finding that applying the child support guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate before a court departs from them.

Wallace v. Bond · filed 1999-08-19(2)

If a chancellor decides not to apply the guidelines of § 43-19-101, a written statement regarding the findings of fact is necessary to establish that applying the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate. The chancellor's passing mention of the guidelines can hardly be said to constitute the kind of analysis required by § 43-19-101.

Section 43-19-101 requires an on-the-record finding when a chancellor departs from its child support guidelines, but an award supported by evidence of actual income can follow the guidelines despite exceeding the percentage of reported income.

Clark v. Clark · filed 1999-11-04(2)

Nonetheless, when a chancellor chooses not to follow the guidelines, this Court has enforced the statutory requirement that the chancellor make an on-the-record determination that the guidelines do not apply. ... Furthermore, a deeper study of the record indicates that the chancellor was not intentionally deviating from the statutory guidelines. Rather, the chancellor was attempting to follow the statutory schedule for child support payments.

Section 43-19-101(2) permits a child support award outside the guidelines when the court makes a specific finding that applying them would be unjust or inappropriate under Section 43-19-103.

Hensarling v. Brenda Roxanne Gray Hensarling · filed 1999-11-05(2)

However, Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2) states that the guidelines apply unless the judicial or administrative body awarding or modifying the child support award makes a written finding or specific finding on the record that the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate in a particular case as determined under the criteria specified in Section 43-19-103. ¶14. In his orders dated November 18, 1998, and October 5, 1999, the chancellor found that special circumstances so exist which would "necessitate a variance from the statutory guidelines in setting Ken's obligation of child support." ... We find that these reasons meet the criteria set out in Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-103(f) & (h).

Section 43-19-101 requires findings to justify a child support award above the presumptive guidelines and a written finding on the guidelines’ reasonableness when annual adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000; a parent’s prior agreement to private school alone does not justify an excess award.

Southerland v. Susan Diane Shoemaker Southerland · filed 2000-02-10(2), (4)

Because the child support award exceeded the presumptive amount in the guidelines, the chancellor was required to make a written finding or specific finding that the presumptive amount was unjust or inappropriate. The trial court was also required to make a written finding of the reasonableness of the presumptive amount under § 43-19-101(4) because the adjusted gross income, for a year, would be over $50,000. ... The chancellor's finding is not adequate under § 43-19-101. While a father's agreement prior to divorce to send a child to private school may be one legitimate factor to be considered, it is by itself an inadequate basis for an award of support in excess of that allowed by the statutory guidelines.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a chancellor who departs from the child support guidelines to justify the departure with written findings of fact.

DHS, STATE OF MISS. v. Fillingane · filed 2000-06-15(2)

This $ 200/month award is contrary to the statutory guidelines, however, and given that the Chancellor made no findings of fact in support of this award, we must reverse and remand for a new determination in this regard. This Court concludes that, on remand, the Chancellor should either follow the statutory guidelines or justify his failure to do so with written findings of fact, as required by law.

Section 43-19-101 allows a child support award above the guideline when the chancellor makes a specific finding on the record that applying the guideline would be unjust or inappropriate.

Grant v. Grant · filed 2000-08-24(2)

The statute also states that a parent of two children shall pay 20% of his or her adjusted gross income for child support, absent a written or specific finding on the record that application of such guideline would be unjust or inappropriate. ... In the present case, the chancellor did make an on-the-record finding to support his slight deviation from the statutory guidelines.

Section 43-19-101 sets presumptively appropriate child support amounts; additional tuition, athletic fees, and car expenses count as child support above those amounts.

Chesney v. Cynthia Ann Howington Chesney · filed 2000-09-11

We agree that the additional costs are in the nature of child support. This conclusion is not altered by the fact that the chancellor dictated a particular use for these additional sums. The statutes establishing child support guidelines permit the chancellor to vary from the presumptively-appropriate amounts dictated by Section 43-19-101 only upon a specific finding by the chancellor as to why the statutory guidelines are inappropriate.

Section 43-19-101’s presumptive child support award cannot be eliminated based on a finding of fifty percent visitation when the schedule provides substantially less time.

Mitchell v. Mitchell · filed 2000-09-19

Accordingly, we find that the chancellor's findings that Eddie was given fifty percent visitation was clearly erroneous, and that the chancellor's decision not to award child support was rebutted by the evidence and was clearly erroneous.

Section 43-19-101 sets presumptive child support amounts; additional obligations for tuition, athletic fees, and a car count as child support above those amounts.

Chesney v. Chesney · filed 2002-01-29

We agree that the additional costs are in the nature of child support. This conclusion is not altered by the fact that the chancellor dictated a particular use for these additional sums. The statutes establishing child support guidelines permit the chancellor to vary from the presumptively appropriate amounts dictated by Section 43-19-101 only upon a specific finding by the chancellor as to why the statutory guidelines are inappropriate.

Section 43-19-101(1) sets child support for one child at fourteen percent of adjusted gross income and requires an on-the-record finding to support a deviation.

Houck v. Houck · filed 2002-03-05(1)

¶ 14. However, the chancellor failed to apply the proper statutory guideline necessary to modify child support. In White v. White, 722 So.2d 731, 734 (Miss. Ct.App.1998), this Court affirmed the rule that "a chancellor's deviation from the Mississippi child support guidelines must be supported by an on the record finding that said deviation is warranted." Id. citing Rakestraw v. Rakestraw, 717 So.2d 1284, 1289 (Miss.App.1998); Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) (Rev.1993). In the case at hand, the chancellor simply cut the child support in half (from $700 to $350) in consideration of the older child's emancipation. The chancellor should have applied the statutory guideline for one child, being fourteen percent of Steve's adjusted gross income; or, alternatively, supported a deviation from the statutory guideline with an on the record finding. Therefore, we reverse and remand on this point.

Section 43-19-101 requires findings to justify an award above the child support guidelines and a written finding on whether the guidelines are reasonable when adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000; a parent's prior agreement to private school alone does not justify a higher award.

Southerland v. Southerland · filed 2002-04-11(2), (4)

Because the child support award exceeded the presumptive amount in the guidelines, the chancellor was required to make a written finding or specific finding that the presumptive amount was unjust or inappropriate. The trial court was also required to make a written finding of the reasonableness of the presumptive amount under § 43-19-101(4) because the adjusted gross income, for a year, would be over $50,000. ... The chancellor's finding is not adequate under § 43-19-101. While a father's agreement prior to divorce to send a child to private school may be one legitimate factor to be considered, it is by itself an inadequate basis for an award of support in excess of that allowed by the statutory guidelines.

Section 43-19-101(2) permits a child support award outside the guidelines when the court makes a written or on-record finding that applying them would be unjust or inappropriate under Section 43-19-103 criteria.

Hensarling v. Hensarling · filed 2002-06-20(2)

However, Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2) states that the guidelines apply unless the judicial or administrative body awarding or modifying the child support award makes a written finding or specific finding on the record that the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate in a particular case as determined under the criteria specified in Section 43-19-103. ¶ 14. In his orders dated November 18, 1998, and October 5, 1999, the chancellor found that special circumstances so exist which would "necessitate a variance from the statutory guidelines in setting Ken's obligation of child support." He noted that as a doctor, Ken has the ability to earn a substantial income, whereas at this time, Brenda has no source of income other than the rehabilitative alimony she will receive for a few years. Also, the children have special needs which he deemed to include private school tuition, as the children's friends and "daily routines and activities" stem from them attending private school. We find that these reasons meet the criteria set out in Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-103(f) & (h).

When a parent's adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000, the chancellor must make written findings on whether applying the child support guidelines is reasonable.

Parker v. MISS. DHS · filed 2002-07-16(4)

The chancellor is required in cases where the adjusted gross income of a parent exceeds $50,000 to make written findings as to whether the application of the statutory guidelines is reasonable. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(4) (Rev.2000). The chancellor made the required findings and established that application of the guidelines was unreasonable and determined that $750 per month was sufficient to meet Darian's needs. Because the chancellor complied with the statutory requirements, we cannot say that the deviation from the statutory guidelines was an abuse of discretion.

Section 43-19-101 creates a rebuttable presumption that a noncustodial parent will pay child support based on a percentage of adjusted gross income, with twenty percent applicable for two children.

Lacey v. Lacey · filed 2002-07-23(1), (2)

The statutory presumption is that the noncustodial parent will provide support and it will be in a specific percentage of adjusted gross income. Miss.Code Ann. §§ 43-19-101(1) (Rev.2000) and 43-19-101(2) (Rev.2000). Thus, a rebuttable presumption exists in this case that Mrs. Lacey as the non-custodial parent is required to provide her two children with twenty-percent of her adjusted gross income or $310 per month.

When adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000, a chancellor may deviate from the child support guidelines based on the circumstances of the case.

Holley v. Holley · filed 2003-08-12(4)

Based on the facts presented in this case, this Court finds that the chancellor was not in error in deviating from the child support guidelines. Therefore, we affirm on this issue.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a written or specific finding to justify child support above the 14% guideline, including additional private school tuition.

Moses v. Moses · filed 2004-03-23(2)

Requiring Christopher to pay half of the tuition over and above the statutory 14% without a written or specific finding by the chancellor as to why the deviation is needed renders the award inappropriate. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2) (Rev.2000).

Section 43-19-101 sets a child support guideline of 22 percent of adjusted gross income for three children and calls for a written finding explaining a different award.

Halle v. Harper · filed 2004-03-30(1), (2)

Since there are three children, there are guidelines that if followed, would cause Mr. Halle to pay child support in the amount of 22 percent of his adjusted gross income. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) (Rev.2000). If the chancellor awards a different amount, the court should make a written finding on the record explaining the deviation. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2).

Section 43-19-101 requires a finding that applying the child support guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate before a court deviates from them; when adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000, the court must also make a written finding on whether applying the guidelines is reasonable.

Yelverton v. Yelverton · filed 2004-04-29(2), (4)

Subsection (4) of section 43-19-101 no doubt applies, since James’s adjusted gross income was unquestionably well above $50,000; however, the chancellor’s findings in today’s case fell short of subsection (4)’s requirement that “the court shall make a written finding in the record as to whether or not the application of the guidelines established in this section is reasonable.” Likewise, subsection (4) must be read in conjunction with subsection (2); therefore, in making this finding of the inapplicability of the statutory guidelines, the chancellor failed to fully comply with Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2) by making a “written finding or specific finding on the record that the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate in a particular case as determined under the criteria specified in Section 43-19-103.”

A court may award child support above the guidelines when it makes the required findings supporting a deviation.

Southerland v. Southerland · filed 2004-06-24(2), (4)

On remand, the chancery court properly made such findings in compliance with this Court's decision, and specifically found that Craig's actions with regard to sending his daughter to a private school amounted to extraordinary expenses not contemplated by the statutory guidelines.

Section 43-19-101 permits a child support award to depart from its presumptive guidelines when the chancellor makes sufficient findings to justify the departure.

Chesney v. Chesney · filed 2004-07-15(2)

We find that the chancellor made sufficient factual findings, supported by the evidentiary record, to rebut the presumption that the statutory guideline of Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 is the appropriate measure of a child support award.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires an on-the-record finding about whether the child support guidelines apply to both initial awards and later modifications.

Turner v. Turner · filed 1999-06-08(2)

However, we note that, under Miss.Code Ann. 43-19-101(2) (Rev. 1993), an on-the-record finding as to the applicability of the child support guidelines is required on both the initial award of child support and any subsequent modification of child support.

Section 43-19-101 sets child support guidelines, but a chancellor may award more after considering the parties' individual circumstances.

Gloria (Gigi) Wright Bresnahan v. Bresnahan · filed 2000-01-27

Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2000) gives only a guideline regarding the amount of child support payments. This statute does not take into account any specific or individual needs; the chancellor must determine this after being informed of the particular facts and needs of the parties involved.

Section 43-19-101 sets the child support guideline for one child at fourteen percent of the parent's adjusted gross income.

Kirkland v. McGraw · filed 2002-02-05

That statute directs a chancellor to set a parent's support obligations at fourteen percent of the parents adjusted gross income for the support of one child. From the records submitted to the court, the chancellor found Ray's adjusted gross income to be $2,260. Applying the statutory guidelines, the court properly determined that Ray should pay $316 per month in child support for Brandon.

Section 43-19-101 provides a child support guideline, but the chancellor must determine the amount based on the parties' particular facts and needs.

Bresnahan v. Bresnahan · filed 2002-05-02

Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2000) gives only a guideline regarding the amount of child support payments. This statute does not take into account any specific or individual needs; the chancellor must determine this after being informed of the particular facts and needs of the parties involved.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires the chancellor’s findings on a child support award to be stated in the record.

James v. James · filed 2000-02-08(2)

The chancellor’s findings were delineated in the record as required by section 43-19-101(2). We find them to be acceptable within the discretion that may be exercised.

Section 43-19-101 permits a child support award above the guidelines when the chancellor makes the required findings on the record.

Southerland v. Susan Diane Shoemaker Southerland · filed 2002-11-26(2), (4)

On remand, the chancery court properly made such findings in compliance with this Court's decision, and specifically found that Craig’s actions with regard to sending his daughter to a private school amounted to extraordinary expenses not contemplated by the statutory guidelines.

Section 43-19-101’s percentage guidelines do not impose a fixed cap; an award above them may be appropriate in light of the case’s circumstances.

Fancher v. Pell · filed 2002-12-05

This 8 percent award over the statutory guidelines is appropriate when considering the facts and circumstances peculiar to this particular case.

When adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000, Section 43-19-101(4) requires a written finding on whether applying the child support guidelines is reasonable.

Thompson v. Thompson · filed 2004-09-14(4)

Allen's adjusted gross income exceeded $50,000. However, the chancellor's opinion and judgment contained no written findings as to whether the statutory guidelines were reasonable or whether a departure was appropriate. Thus, we have no guidance as to how the chancellor arrived at child support in the amount of $400 per month, per child. The chancellor clearly erred in failing to reveal her findings as to the needs of the children or the amount of salary upon which the child support award was based.

Section 43-19-101(4) requires a written finding that applying the child support guidelines to income over $50,000 is reasonable; a succinct finding can satisfy that requirement.

Peters v. Peters · filed 2004-12-07(4)

Mississippi Code Annotated § 43-19-101(4) requires a written finding that the application of the statutory guidelines to an income in excess of $50,000 was reasonable. ... While this statement is rather succinct, it is nonetheless a written finding of reasonableness.

Section 43-19-101 requires a written finding on whether guideline child support is reasonable when income exceeds $50,000; the finding need not be more detailed when the record supports the award.

Henderson v. Henderson · filed 2006-11-21

The guidelines for two children is twenty percent of the adjusted gross income; however, if the income is more than $50,000 the court shall make a written finding in the record as to whether this amount is reasonable. Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(Rev.2004). ... Even though we would have benefitted from more detailed information regarding the reasonableness of child support, we find that the chancellor did not abuse his discretion or commit manifest error.

Section 43-19-101(4) requires a written finding on whether the child support guidelines are reasonable when a parent's adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000; a succinct finding can satisfy that requirement.

Reid v. Reid · filed 2008-11-25(4)

Mississippi Code Annotated section 43-19-101(4) (Rev.2004) states that if a parent's adjusted gross income is more than $50,000 a year, the court "shall make a written finding in the record as to whether or not the application of the guidelines established in this section is reasonable." ... Likewise, in the current case, the chancellor's statement was a sufficient written finding.

Section 43-19-101(4) requires a written finding on whether the child-support guidelines are reasonable when adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000.

Williams v. Williams · filed 2011-03-15(4)

Therefore, the chancellor would still have been required under section 43-19-101(4) to make a written finding as to whether or not the suggested statutory percentage was reasonable. ... Looking at the chancellor’s on-the-record written considerations, this Court cannot say that the chancellor abused his discretion in deviating from the guidelines, nor can we say the chancellor failed to make any written findings.

When the child support guideline percentage is applied to income over $50,000, subsection (4) requires written findings on whether that application is reasonable.

Collins v. Collins · filed 2012-08-21(4)

The 14% guideline is mandatory for income up to $50,000. If the guideline percentage is applied to income over $50,000, as in this case, the chancellor is required by Mississippi Code Annotated § 43-19-101(4) to make written findings regarding the reasonableness of the percentage’s application to income over the threshold, which the chancellor did.

Section 43-19-101 permits child support above its guidelines if the chancellor makes a written finding that applying them would be unjust or inappropriate under § 43-19-103.

Riley v. Riley · filed 2004-10-05(2)

We also recognize that child support may be granted in excess of the statutory guidelines, so long as the chancellor makes a written finding on the record that the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate in a particular case as determined by the criteria set forth in Mississippi Code Annotated § 43-19-103 (Rev.2000).

Section 43-19-101 permits an upward deviation from the child support guidelines when the court makes a sufficient finding that applying them would be unjust or inappropriate; reduced visitation can justify a deviation.

Gray v. Gray · filed 2005-08-16(2)

Indeed, it is logical that a parent will incur greater expense due to the non-custodial parent's failure to exercise visitation, and the chancellor's finding, although unusual, is reasonable and sufficient justification for the variation in the award of child support.

A chancellor may depart from the presumptive child support guidelines by finding on the record that applying them would be unjust or inappropriate.

Chesney v. Chesney · filed 2005-09-08(2)

However, for this Court to affirm an award which deviates from the guideline of Section 43-19-101(1), the chancellor must overcome the rebuttable presumption that the statutory award is the appropriate measure of child support by making an on-the-record finding that it would be unjust or inappropriate to apply the guidelines in the instant case.

Section 43-19-101(4) permits a chancellor to depart from the child support guidelines when the paying parent's income exceeds $50,000.

Yelverton v. Yelverton · filed 2006-08-22(4)

Furthermore since James makes more than $50,000 the chancellor does not have to follow these guidelines. Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(4) (Rev. 2004).

Section 43-19-101(2) requires specific factual findings to justify a child support award that deviates from the guidelines.

Seymour v. Seymour · filed 2006-10-31(2)

Since Phillip was ordered to pay twenty-two percent of his reported adjusted gross income plus one-half of the girls' parochial school tuition, the chancellor was required to make specific findings of fact to justify deviation from the child support guidelines. Id. (citing Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2) (Rev.2004)). ... We find that the chancellor's findings were sufficient to support an award of twenty-two percent of Phillip's reported adjusted gross income plus one-half of the children's parochial school tuition.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a chancellor who deviates from the child support guidelines to find in writing or on the record that applying them would be unjust or inappropriate under Section 43-19-103's criteria.

Yelverton v. Yelverton · filed 2007-07-26(2)

Likewise, subsection (4) must be read in conjunction with subsection (2); therefore, in making this finding of the inapplicability of the statutory guidelines, the chancellor failed to fully comply with Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2) by making a "written finding or specific finding on the record that the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate in a particular case as determined under the criteria specified in Section 43-19-103."

Section 43-19-101(1) presumes its child-support guidelines are correct; a chancellor must explain on the record why applying them would be unjust or inappropriate before deviating.

Lowrey v. Lowrey · filed 2007-09-06(1)

Mississippi Code Section 43-19-101(1) (Rev. 2004) provides child-support guidelines that are entitled to a rebuttable presumption of correctness. See Chesney v. Chesney, 910 So. 2d 1057, 1061 (Miss. 2005). This Court will not affirm a child-support award that deviates from the statutory guidelines unless the chancellor “overcome[s] the rebuttable presumption . . . by making an on-the-record finding that it would be unjust or inappropriate to apply the guidelines in the instant case.” Id.

When a parent’s adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000, the chancellor must make a written finding on whether the guideline amount is reasonable and may deviate from it when the circumstances warrant.

Hults v. Hults · filed 2009-06-30(4)

Section 43-19-101(4) further provides, in part, that if the parent’s adjusted gross income is more than $50,000, the chancellor must make a written finding in the record as to whether the application of the guideline amount of child support is reasonable. ... In the case at bar, the chancellor considered the guidelines and rejected them as being unreasonable. Furthermore, the chancellor concluded that Alan’s income was difficult to predict in light of his uncertain overtime pay. We cannot disagree with the chancellor’s conclusion.

Section 43-19-101(1)’s child-support guidelines are presumed correct, and a chancellor must explain on the record why applying them would be unjust or inappropriate before deviating.

Lowrey v. Lowrey · filed 2009-11-05(1)

Mississippi Code Section 43-19-101(1) (Rev.2004) provides child-support guidelines that are entitled to a rebut-table presumption of correctness. ... This Court will not affirm a child-support award that deviates from the statutory guidelines unless the chancellor “overcome[s] the rebuttable presumption ... by making an on-the-record finding that it would be unjust or inappropriate to apply the guidelines in the instant case.”

Section 43-19-101(2) permits a written deviation from the child-support guidelines when applying them would be unjust or inappropriate; it does not require a detailed explanation of the precise amount chosen.

Knighten v. Hooper · filed 2010-01-12(2)

Chancellors may deviate from the child-support guidelines if they determine, in writing, that application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate in the particular case. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2). ... Knighten correctly argues that the chancellor did not explain in detail how she settled on the precise amount of $400. However, he cites no authority that supports his proposition that such a detailed explanation was required.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a written or on-the-record finding before a chancellor departs from the child-support guidelines based on a parent's earning capacity.

Wheat v. Wheat · filed 2010-06-24(2)

The guidelines must apply "unless the judicial or administrative body awarding or modifying the child support award makes a written finding or specific finding on the record that the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate...." Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2) (Rev.2009). Moreover, while the chancellor could have based the child support on Judy's earning capacity rather than her actual earnings, no on-the-record findings were made that Judy's earning capacity was the basis for the $750 award of monthly child support.

For two children, subsection (1) sets child support at twenty percent of the payor’s adjusted gross income; the chancellor must find the payor’s income to show whether an award follows the guideline.

Seghini v. Seghini · filed 2010-08-17(1)

For two children, the guidelines set child support at twenty percent of the payor’s adjusted gross income. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) (Rev.2009). ... The chancellor did not make a finding that deviation from the guidelines was warranted.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a chancellor to calculate the guideline child-support amount and make specific findings justifying any deviation.

Evans v. Evans · filed 2011-04-26(2)

Though the chancellor may well be correct that a deviation above the presumptively correct guideline amounts is warranted, he must provide adequate findings to support the deviation. We reverse and remand on this issue with instructions that the chancellor calculate the proper award according to the guidelines and justify any deviation with specific findings.

The two-child guideline presumptively sets support at 20% of the paying parent’s adjusted gross income, but visitation travel costs can justify a departure from that amount.

Garcia v. Garcia · filed 2012-08-28(1)

¶ 13. After finding that there had been a material change in circumstances, the chancery court applied the appropriate statutory percentage to Christopher’s reported monthly adjusted gross income of $7,002.86 and determined that his new child-support obligation should be $1,400 per month. However, the court declined to increase his child-support payments “because of [the] travel distance involved for visitation and because [the chancery court had] placed the primary financial burden for such travel on Christopher, as well as the fact that Christopher [would] have the children for basically the entire summer....” Based on the above, the chancery court provided sufficient justification for its refusal to increase Christopher’s monthly child-support payments.

Section 43-19-101(2) permits a chancellor to deviate from the child-support guidelines with specific findings under section 43-19-103, without addressing every listed criterion.

Marin v. Stewart · filed 2013-09-24(2)

Procedural bar notwithstanding, while section 43-19-101(2) requires that the chancellor make specific findings under the criteria in section 43-19-103 in order to deviate from the guidelines, it does not require that all criteria be considered in order for the findings to be sufficient.

When adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000, section 43-19-101(4) requires written findings explaining the basis for the child-support calculation and whether applying the guidelines is reasonable.

O'Brien v. O'Brien · filed 2014-02-11(4)

We find that the chancellor’s statement was not enough to satisfy the requirements of section 43-19-101(4). To be sufficient, the chancellor should disclose the basis for the calculations. This would require the chancellor to state whether the award was based on the statutory child-support guidelines (section 43-19-101(1)) and discuss the reasonableness of the award. Therefore, we reverse the chancellor’s award of child support and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Section 43-19-101(2) allows a child-support award to depart from the guidelines when the chancellor makes specific findings that applying them would be unjust or inappropriate.

Taylor v. Timmons · filed 2017-06-06(2)

However, the chancellor found that a strict application would be “unjust and inappropriate after considering all the facts and circumstances,” which included Taylor’s payment of health and dental insurance, all uncovered medical and dental expenses, extracurricular activities, and potential future private-school tuition. In view of the facts and circumstances in the record, the chancellor provided sufficient justification for modifying Taylor’s monthly child-support payments and deviating from the statutory guidelines.

Section 43-19-101’s child-support calculation guidelines do not apply when a child’s clear and extreme conduct has forfeited the right to support.

Copeland v. Gary Neal Copeland, Jr · filed 2017-08-31

Once the chancellor determined that, based on the clear and extreme conduct of the children, child support was forfeited, computing an amount of child support using the formula provided by the guidelines is irrelevant. It is a non sequitur to require a chancellor to apply irrelevant guidelines effecting the amount of child support, when the same chancellor has decreed the duty to pay child support no longer exists.

Section 43-19-101(2) permits a departure from the child-support guidelines when the court makes specific findings on the record explaining why applying them would be unjust or inappropriate.

Black v. Black · filed 2017-11-07(2)

We find there was substantial evidence in the record to support the chancellor’s findings. The chancellor complied with the statutory mandate of making specific findings on the record – based in large part upon the mutual agreement among the parties regarding the lifestyle they wished their children to maintain. See § 43-19-101(2).

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a written or specific finding to order pre-college tuition above the statutory child-support percentage.

Elkins v. Elkins · filed 2018-02-06(2)

Ordinarily, “[p]re-college tuition is considered part of child support, not an extraordinary expense,” and a ... chancellor may not require a parent to pay tuition over and above the statutory percentage “without a written or specific finding . . . as to why the deviation is needed.” ... As Kimberlana has provided no basis for the chancellor to make such a finding, we find no abuse of discretion in the chancellor’s ruling on this issue.

When a parent’s adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000, subsection (4) allows a chancellor to make a written finding that applying the child support guidelines would be unreasonable.

Striebeck v. Striebeck · filed 2005-09-13(4)

Surprisingly, Ruth Ann does not mention the provision of Section 43-19-101, which allows a chancellor to make a written finding as to the reasonableness of the application of the statutory guidelines in the event a parent’s adjusted gross income exceeds $50,000. ... We agree that the chancellor made sufficient findings in support of his conclusion that applying the statutory guidelines would be unreasonable.

For a payor earning more than $50,000 in adjusted gross income, § 43-19-101(4) requires a written finding on whether applying the child support guidelines is reasonable.

Wallace v. Wallace · filed 2007-09-11(4)

Furthermore, if the payor earns an adjusted gross income of more than $50,000, "the court shall make a written finding in the record as to whether or not the application of the guidelines" is reasonable. Miss.Code Annotated § 43-19-101(4) (Rev.2004). ... The chancellor found, after considering the relevant evidence, that the application of the fourteen percent guideline for child support alone was not reasonable in this case and thus ordered payment of other expenses in addition to the child support. We determine that the chancellor's findings were adequate in support of her departure from the statutory guidelines.

Section 43-19-101(4) requires a written finding on whether applying the child support guidelines is reasonable, but omitting it was not reversible error where the chancellor considered the guideline amount and the appellant did not challenge the award.

Morris v. Morris · filed 2008-10-07(4)

In this case, although he did not make a written finding as to whether the application of the guidelines was reasonable pursuant to section 43-19-101(4), it is clear that the chancellor considered the twenty percent statutory guideline figure set forth in section 43-19-101(1) in setting David’s child support obligation. Moreover, the chancellor stated that he set the amount of child support “taking into account statutory discretion and the children’s needs.” Finally, the chancellor’s opinion reflects that the amount of the monthly child support that David was ordered to pay was $386 per month less than the amount set forth by the guidelines. Given these facts, and the fact that David makes no contention that the amount of child support awarded was unreasonable, we find no reversible error in the chancellor’s failure make a written finding as to the reasonableness of the guidelines in this case. This issue is without merit.

Section 43-19-101 does not cap child support at fourteen percent of $50,000; applying the guideline to income above $50,000 requires written findings that doing so is reasonable.

Smith v. Smith · filed 2009-05-26(1), (4)

Section 43-19-101(1) does not state that fourteen percent of $50,000 is envisioned as a “cap” on the amount of child support a non-custodial parent can expect to pay a custodial parent. Instead, if the chancellor applies the child support guidelines found in section 43-19-101(1) to income in excess of $50,000, the chancellor must provide findings on the record pursuant to section 43-19-101(4) that it is reasonable under the circumstances to do so.

Section 43-19-101(2) requires a chancellor to make specific findings when deviating from the statutory child support guidelines.

Weeks v. Weeks · filed 2009-12-01(2)

Furthermore, a chancellor is required to make specific findings only when he deviates from the statutory guidelines. See Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2) (Rev.2004); Knutson v. Knutson, 704 So.2d 1331, 1335 (¶¶ 25-27) (Miss.1997).

Section 43-19-101(3) bases child support on current income and includes potential income sources reasonably expected to be available to the parent.

Denham v. Denham · filed 2022-02-01(3)

Our review of the record shows that the chancellor awarded child support in accordance with the statutory guidelines based on Jason’s current income, as is required. Section 43-19-101(3) provides the calculation for determining a party’s adjusted gross income, and it includes “[d]etermin[ing] gross income from all potential sources that may reasonably be expected to be available to the absent parent.”

Section 43-19-101(1) creates a rebuttable presumption that a noncustodial parent pays twenty-two percent of adjusted gross income to support three children.

Gussio v. Gussio · filed 2023-09-26(1)

Mississippi’s child support guidelines establish a “rebuttable presumption” that the non-custodial parent should pay twenty-two percent of the parent’s adjusted gross income for the support of three children. Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) (Rev. 2021). ... Therefore, we find no reversible error in the chancellor’s determination of child support.

When applying the child support guidelines, a court must account for ordered school tuition and additional school costs in the total support award.

McGovern v. McGovern · filed 2023-10-03(1)

Mississippi Code Annotated section 43-19-101(1) (Rev. 2015) provides guidelines for ordering child support based on a percentage of the party’s adjusted gross income (AGI) set by the number of minor children the party is responsible for supporting. ... The chancery court’s judgment, as it stands, potentially awards Tera child support far greater than what was accounted for by the chancellor. ... Therefore, we reverse and remand this issue back to the chancery court to reconsider the children’s school tuition and additional costs and to order child support after consideration of those findings.

Section 43-19-101(4) requires a written finding on whether applying the child support guidelines is reasonable when adjusted gross income exceeds $100,000.

Baumbach v. Baumbach · filed 2018-04-03(4)

While we acknowledge that Robert’s adjusted gross income exceeded $100,000, as noted by Judge Fair in his dissent, section 43-19-101(4) requires in such cases that the chancery court “make a written finding in the record as to whether or not the application of the guidelines established in this section is reasonable.” Here, the chancellor simply determined that Robert “shall pay child support in the amount of $1,817.00 per month” and additionally, “shall be responsible for the timely payment of all tuition and fees associated with the children attending Annunciation Catholic School.” There were no specific findings by the court as to its reasons for exceeding the statutory maximum for child support.

Section 43-19-101(4) requires a written finding on whether applying the child-support guidelines is reasonable when adjusted gross income exceeds $100,000.

Vandenbrook v. Charlotte Emma McKinney Vandenbrook · filed 2019-03-26(4)

Since Chris’s income exceeded $100,000, the chancellor was required to make written findings as to whether the application of the guidelines was reasonable—in compliance with section 43-19-101(4). The chancellor failed to do so.

Section 43-19-101(4) allows a court to find that the child support guidelines should not control when annual adjusted gross income exceeds $100,000.

Thomas v. Brandie Jean Brown Thomas · filed 2019-06-11(4)

However, we find no error or abuse of discretion. ... As noted above, the chancellor found that Randy’s annual adjusted gross income exceeded $100,000 and that the guidelines should not be “controlling” in this case. See Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(4).

When a parent’s annual adjusted gross income exceeds $100,000, subsection (4) requires a written finding on whether applying the child-support guidelines is reasonable.

Lageman v. Sonya Leigh (Szymanski) Lageman · filed 2021-03-23(4)

As a result of the chancery court’s thorough analysis of its child support award pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated section 43-19-101(4) on the record and within its written decree of divorce, we find no error in the award of child support.

For a parent earning more than $100,000 annually, subsection (4) permits a departure from the child support guidelines with a written finding on whether applying them is reasonable.

Descher v. April Pucheu Descher; · filed 2020-01-14(4)

Where the parent makes more than $100,000 annually, however, the chancellor may deviate from the statutory guidelines by making a “written finding in the record as to whether or not the application of the guidelines . . . is reasonable.” Id. § 43-19-101(4). ... Here, the chancellor’s award of child support is supported by the record, and his decision was not manifest error, nor an abuse of discretion.

Section 43-19-101(3)(d) allows a deduction for children living with the parent, including children born after the child for whom support is sought.

Willie Grace, Jr. v. Mississippi Department of Human Services · filed 1995-05-24(3)(d)

The statute does not limit the deduction to pre- existing children; therefore, children born after the children before the court but residing with the parent should be considered as a deduction by the lower court under Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (3)(d). The lower court erred in failing to give credit for both children living in Grace's home.

Section 43-19-101(3)(d) requires courts to consider a deduction for children living with the parent, including children born after the child for whom support is sought.

Grace v. Department of Human Services · filed 1997-02-06(3)(d)

The statute does not limit the deduction to pre-existing children; therefore, children born after the children before the court but residing with the parent should be considered as a deduction by the lower court under Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(3)(d). The lower court erred in failing to give credit for both children living in Grace's home.

Section 43-19-101(3)(d) permits a trial court to deduct an appropriate amount for a child living in the noncustodial parent's home when calculating child support, but leaves that deduction to the court's discretion.

Bailey v. Bailey · filed 1997-04-07(3)(d)

Furthermore, while Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(3)(d) allows the trial court to deduct an appropriate amount to account for the expense of a child living in the non-custodial parent's home for purposes of calculating child support, the deduction is purely discretionary.

Section 43-19-101(3)(d) permits, but does not require, a deduction for a child living in the non-custodial parent's home when calculating child support.

Bailey v. Bailey · filed 1998-12-10(3)(d)

Furthermore, while Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(3)(d) allows the trial court to deduct an appropriate amount to account for the expense of a child living in the non-custodial parent's home for purposes of calculating child support, the deduction is purely discretionary.

Section 43-19-101(3)(d) allows, but does not require, a chancellor to deduct an amount for a child living in the obligor's home.

McClee v. Simmons · filed 2002-12-17(3)(d)

Under Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(3)(d) (Rev.2000), the chancellor may subtract an amount that he deems appropriate to account for the needs of another child living in the home of the absent parent. This is clearly left up to the discretion of the chancellor and is not a mandatory provision of the statute. ... The chancellor did not abuse his discretion and we uphold his decision.

Section 43-19-101(3)(d) permits, but does not require, an income adjustment for children living with the parent ordered to pay support.

Magruder v. Magruder · filed 2004-08-31(3)(d)

Mississippi Code Annotated Section 43-19-101(3)(d) (Rev.2000), on which Randy relies, does not require the chancellor to make an adjustment to gross income for children living with the parent ordered to pay child support. The statute provides only that "[i]f the absent parent is also the parent of another child or other children residing with him, then the court may subtract an amount that it deems appropriate to account for the needs of said child or children."

Section 43-19-101(3)(d) allows a chancellor to adjust child support when a parent has custody of a child; whether to adjust it and by how much is discretionary.

Dunn v. Dunn · filed 2005-09-13(3)(d)

Section 43-19-101(3)(d) of the Mississippi Code empowers the chancellor to take into consideration the fact that a parent retains custody of a child, allowing him to make adjustments to child support payments reflecting such circumstances. Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(3)(d) (Rev.2004). However, whether an adjustment is to be made, and if so, how much, is left to the chancellor's discretion. ... The chancellor did not abuse his discretion by refusing to award child support to David.

When a parent owing support has another child living with them, the court may account for that child’s needs by subtracting an appropriate amount from adjusted gross income.

Grove v. Agnew · filed 2009-07-28(3)(d)

Subsection (3)(d) of section 43-19-101 provides the method by which the chancellor may account for another child residing with the absent parent. ... Here, the chancellor did not subtract an amount from the adjusted gross income; rather, he improperly used the guideline percentage for two children and divided it between the two children.

Section 43-19-101(3)(d) allows a court to subtract an appropriate amount to account for other children residing with the support payor.

Morland v. Morland · filed 2024-10-29(3)(d)

Mississippi Code Annotated section 43-19-101(3)(d) provides that if the absent parent is also the parent of another child or other children residing with him, then the court may subtract an amount that it deems appropriate to account for the needs of said child or children. We find that the chancellor did not abuse his discretion by setting child support based on the statutory guidelines with the deduction to account for the needs of his other children residing with him.