Wife of 14 Years Gets Rehabilitative Alimony, But Only 8 Years

Tennessee alimony divorce case summary after around 14 years married.

Andrea Renea Hopwood v. Corey Daniel Hopwood

The husband and wife in this Tennessee divorce case were married in 1999 and had four children.  The wife filed for divorce in 2012, alleging irreconcilable differences and inappropriate marital conduct.

The wife had not worked much outside the home, but had recently worked as a teacher’s assistant.  She had decided to go back to college to become a math teacher, and determined that this would take about eight years part time.  The father had an income of about $100,000 per year, but many of the couple’s expenses had also been paid directly by his companies.

Much of the evidence at trial focused on the husband’s income, and the trial court found that much of his testimony lacked credibility.  The court then made rulings as to property division, child support, and alimony.   Ultimately, the trial court awarded the wife rehabilitative alimony of $2,500 per month for 15 years.  The husband appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals a number of issues, including the award of alimony.

After addressing the other issues, the appeals court turned to the issue of alimony.  It first noted that the trial court has broad discretion in setting the alimony award.  It then looked at the trial court’s determination of the husband’s income, and held that it was proper.

It then considered the statutory factors and held that an award of rehabilitative alimony was proper.  The husband’s income was much greater than the wife’s earning capacity, and the court noted that this factor pointed toward the need for alimony.  However, it agreed with the father that the length of time for rehabilitative alimony, 15 years, was excessive.  It noted that she was in good health and would be able to finish her degree in eight years.  There was no evidence that suggested that it would take her fifteen years to rehabilitate herself.  Therefore, it held that the longer period of time was unreasonable, and that the award of rehabilitative alimony should be limited to eight years.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s ruling in part, but reversed in part and sent the case back for further proceedings.

No. M2015-01010-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. June 23, 2016).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Alimony Law in Tennessee.