Leger v. Leger — Mississippi Court of Appeals affirms that ex-husband must pay mortgage principal and interest

Case
Colby Ryan Leger v. Annie Cardenas Leger
Court
Mississippi Court of Appeals
Judge
Carlton, P.J.; Westbrooks, J.; Emfinger, J.
Date Decided
October 27, 2026
Docket No.
2025-CA-00056-COA
Topics
Divorce; Property settlement; Contract interpretation; Mortgage obligations
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Colby Ryan Leger and Annie Cardenas Leger divorced in 2020 under an agreed property order. Annie received the former marital home, while Colby agreed to remain responsible for its outstanding indebtedness until paid in full.

In resolving Annie’s first contempt petition in 2022, the parties entered a modified agreed order. It said Colby would be responsible for the monthly principal payment on the pre-divorce home debt and Annie would be solely responsible for taxes, insurance, and escrow. The modified order preserved all original terms not changed. After paying principal and interest for about eighteen months, Colby began paying principal only. The chancellor ruled that he remained responsible for both principal and interest, found arrearages, but declined to hold him in contempt.

The Court’s Holding

The Mississippi Court of Appeals affirmed. Reading the two agreed orders together, the court held that the 2022 modification did not assign responsibility for mortgage interest to Annie. Although it specifically addressed principal, taxes, insurance, and escrow, it was silent as to interest.

That silence left the original order’s allocation intact under the modified order’s fallback clause. Because the original order made Colby responsible for the home’s remaining indebtedness, and Colby did not dispute that this included principal and interest, he remained obligated to pay both components of the house note.

Key Takeaways

  • A property-settlement agreement is interpreted under contract principles.
  • A modification that does not address a particular obligation leaves that obligation governed by an incorporated original agreement.
  • Contract terms must be read as a whole, including provisions preserving unmodified terms.

Why It Matters

The decision underscores that narrowly phrased amendments to divorce property agreements may not displace obligations omitted from the amendment. Parties modifying mortgage-related responsibilities should expressly allocate principal, interest, escrow, taxes, and insurance to avoid disputes over what remains in force.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top