Hollis v. Baker
Court of Appeals of Mississippi
1DissentCarlton, J.
¶ 24. I respectfully dissent from the majority’s opinion. The majority errs in stating that the alimony awarded in this case is periodic alimony and therefore subject to modification. The agreement incorporated into the divorce decree specified a duration of monthly alimony payments in providing that Hollis would pay Baker alimony until either of their deaths, and the agreement provided that if Baker died, then Hollis was required to make the payments to their minor child instead of Baker.1 The agreement in the divorce decree did not order a monthly payment amount with no fixed duration or…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- East v. EastMississippi Supreme Court · 1986
- Bowe v. BoweMississippi Supreme Court · 1990
- Cunningham v. LanierMississippi Supreme Court · 1991
- Boone v. BooneCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2012
- Chroniger v. ChronigerCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2005