Harrington v. Harrington
Supreme Court of Mississippi
648 So.2d 543 (1994)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
A judgment of divorce between Mark and Donnett Harrington in Mississippi granted custody of the Harringtons’ two daughters to Donnett and awarded overnight-visitation rights to Mark on the first and third weekends of each month. One year later, Donnett filed a motion to modify the judgment, alleging a material change in circumstances that adversely affected the daughters. Specifically, Donnett claimed that Mark was living with his girlfriend, Stephanie Milam, outside of marriage. At a hearing, Donnett testified that one of the daughters had come home upset from a weekend at Mark’s residence and stated that Stephanie had yelled and cursed at them. Mark denied the claim and argued that Stephanie’s presence in his home did not confuse or upset his daughters. Mark did admit, however, that his daughters had asked him when he would marry Stephanie. The trial court held that, although Mark professed to be teaching his children Christian principles, Mark’s conduct was inconsistent with that claim due to the fact that he was living with a woman outside of marriage. The trial judge held that Mark could no longer have overnight visitation with the children and ordered that at no time could the daughters be in the presence of Stephanie or engaged in a discussion about Stephanie. Mark appealed, arguing that the trial court’s order was unreasonable.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Sullivan, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Lee, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 803,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
