TN Alimony Should Be Determined Only After Property Division

Tennessee alimony divorce case summary after 33 years married.

The husband and wife in this Montgomery County, Tennessee case were married in 1981. At the time of their 2014 divorce, their only child had reached adulthood. The husband was 63 years old at the time of trial, and had served in the military for 20 years, with over half of that service being during the marriage. He was receiving a military pension of about $1500 per month, and earned an average salary of just over $5000. He also received a pension of $405 per month and social security benefits of $1400 per month.

The wife was 66 years old at the time of trial, and had retired at the age of 62. Her only income was social security of $878 per month, as well as payments from a 401(k) of $500 per month. She had recently undergone surgeries, and had extensive arm injuries and diabetes.

After trial, the trial court divided the parties’ property, and awarded the wife $1,500 per month alimony in futuro. It also required the husband to take out a life insurance policy in the amount of $250,000.

The husband then appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals. Much of his appeal related to the property division, as he argued that the property had been improperly divided. In particular, he argued that dividing the military pension was error. Significantly, he argued that the trial court had made insufficient factual findings to support its decision.

With regard to the factual findings, the Court of Appeals agreed with the husband. It first cited the Tennessee statute relating to property division, and noted that there are specific factual considerations that need to be addressed in dividing property. While there were numerous fact findings made, the appeals court concluded that most of them were relevant only to the issue of alimony, and not the property division.

The appeals court found it especially troubling that there were no specific findings as to the value of certain items of property, so that the appeals court could determine whether the division had been equitable. For these reasons, the Court of Appeals remanded the case for more clear factual findings in the property division.

The appeals court then turned to the issue of alimony, and looked at the statutory factors to be considered in awarding alimony. It agreed with the trial court that the evidence in the case supported the award of alimony. However, it also remanded this portion of the case, because any change to the property division might affect the need for alimony. It stressed that the award of alimony should be made only after the property division is complete. Since the property division had to be revisited, it asked the trial court to make its findings as to alimony only after the property division.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals remanded the case for further proceedings.

No. M2015-01408-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. July 25, 2016).

See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Alimony Law in Tennessee.