King v. King

FAIR, J.,

specially concurring:

¶ 12. The issue dividing the majority and dissent is whether there was a Hemsley-Ferguson-Armstrong4 compliant treatment of military retirement benefits belonging to Joseph. Those benefits were being paid to him monthly, having matured from a dormant asset into a stream of income. For that reason I concur with the majority in recognizing that the treatment of such benefits by the chancellor was in accord with the intent of those three cases and their progeny.

¶ 13. The Supreme Court of Mississippi handed down Hemsley and Ferguson in July 1994, providing factors…