Articles Posted in Divorce Defense

I routinely deal with cases involving a spouse who wants a divorce because he or she learned that the other spouse cheated or committed some other type of marital misconduct. Often times, when a client hires me to help with a fault-based divorce, especially where the ground for divorce is adultery, one of the first questions I ask my client is: Did you forgive your spouse? A “yes” to this question can certainly complicate an otherwise clear-cut divorce. In Mississippi, forgiving–or condoning–a spouse’s past marital transgressions may legally bar a complaining-spouse’s right to a divorce. As a result, condonation is one of most often used defenses to fault-based divorce in Mississippi.Condonation occurs when a spouse voluntarily forgives the other spouse for committing some sort of marital misconduct. Where a spouse forgives the other’s misconduct, there is an unspoken promise that such misconduct will not recur. So even if the complaining-spouse condones or grants forgiveness for the other spouse’s misconduct, such forgiveness is conditioned on the offending-spouse’s continued good behavior. For example, if a spouse forgives the other for committing adultery, then the other spouse either continues the extramarital affair or commits adultery again, then the prior condonation or forgiveness for the first instance of adultery would likely be invalid. More so, it is important to note that condonation is most often used as a defense against divorce based on grounds of adultery whereby the offending-spouse claims that the complaining-spouse forgave him or her for an extramarital affair. However, the condonation defense is not limited to just adultery. For example, the Mississippi Court of Appeals in Smith held that the defendant’s wife did not condone his excessive gambling habit simply by accompanying him to the casino where he regularly gambled. Smith v. Smith, 90 So. 3d 1259, 1266 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011).
Continue Reading

In terms of divorce defenses under Mississippi law, “antenuptial knowledge” may simply be defined as a complaining-spouse’s (the spouse filing for divorce) pre-marital knowledge of the defendant-spouse’s pre-existing bad habits, condition, or other marital impediment that now is alleged to present a cause for divorce. For a defendant-spouse to rely on the defense of antenuptial knowledge, there must be evidence that the complaining-spouse was fully aware of the defendant’s alleged pre-marital conduct before entering into the marriage, or evidence showing that the complaining-spouse had such reliable information that a reasonable person would have known about the defendant’s particular pre-marital conduct, which is the alleged ground for divorce. See N. SHELTON HAND, MISSISSIPPI DIVORCE, ALIMONY, AND CHILD CUSTODY § 5:13 (2014). Thus, actual or constructive antenuptial knowledge of a defendant-spouse’s impediment giving rise to the divorce is sufficient to establish a valid defense against the divorce in Mississippi.

Since 1959, there seems to be no significant case addressing the antenuptial knowledge defense by the Mississippi Supreme Court or Court of Appeals. The most notable case where the Mississippi Supreme Court directly and substantively addressed the antenuptial knowledge defense to divorce was in Kincaid v. Kincaid. In that case, the wife filed for divorce asserting that her husband was a habitual drunkard. Kincaid v. Kincaid, 42 So. 2d 108, 109 (Miss. 1949); see MS § 93-5-1 (5) (2014). Seeking to prevent the divorce, the husband in the case claimed that the wife knew or should have known of his habitual drunkenness before the marriage and therefore should not be able to complain about it now. Accordingly, the Mississippi Supreme Court explained that the crucial issue in the case was whether the husband sufficiently established that the wife knew or had good reason to know of the husband’s habitual drunkenness at the time of, or before, the marriage. Id. In assessing Mississippi law, as one commentator has stated, the Kincaid court “suggested that premarital knowledge of [] conditions such as habitual drunkenness, drug use, imprisonment or impotency may bar divorce.” DEBORAH BELL, BELL ON MISSISSIPPI FAMILY LAW § 4.03[1] (2d. ed. 2011). Ultimately, the Kincaid court held that there was not sufficient evidence to establish the wife’s antenuptial knowledge of the husband’s habitual drunkenness in order to bar a divorce because “[a]t the most, she knew only that he was an occasional and moderate social drinker [, not] an habitual drunkard before marriage . . . .” Id. at 109-110.
Continue Reading

One of the things that I have learned from my experience as a divorce attorney in Mississippi is that divorce is defendable. Some clients that retain my services are still in love with their spouse and genuinely want their marriage to work out and do not want a divorce, and they are willing to “fight” for their marriage or defend against a divorce. When addressing the concerns of the clients that don’t want a divorce, I generally inform them that there are several ways to legally defend against divorce because, in essence, divorce is nothing more than a lawsuit. And like any lawsuit, there are defenses available to the defendant-spouse in a divorce action in Mississippi.

It is important to remember that the spouse seeking a divorce bears the burden alleging certain marital misconduct committed by the defendant-spouse and proving any alleged grounds for divorce with sufficient evidence. Lindsey v. Lindsey, 818 So. 2d 1191, 1194 (Miss. 2002). But, the defendant-spouse must specifically raise any and all affirmative defenses available in answering the divorce complaint. One of the most commonly raised defenses to fault-based divorce in Mississippi is recrimination.
Continue Reading

Contact Information