RN Entitled to Rehabilitative Alimony in Divorce for Broken Leg
Tennessee alimony divorce case summary after 21 years married.
Sonja Broyles Williams v. Stewart Ashley Williams
The husband and wife in this Hardin County, Tennessee, case were married in 1996 and had four children, two of whom were still minors at the time of their divorce. The husband was the general manager of a car dealership. The wife was a registered nurse who worked off and on during the marriage, both full time and part time.
The wife had filed for divorce in 2012, but the parties reconciled. In 2012, there was an altercation between the parties in which the wife’s leg was broken. The wife testified that this was the result of an assault, but the husband testified that the wife was the aggressor and broke her leg while pursuing him.
After trial, Judge Larry McKenzie resolved this issue in favor of husband. The trial court also ruled on various other issues. The husband was named the children’s primary residential parent. The wife was awarded rehabilitative alimony for three years.
The wife appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals and raised a number of issues, including the question of alimony. She argued that she should have received alimony in futuro rather than rehabilitative alimony.
The appeals court first addressed the issue of custody. It concluded that the lower court’s decision naming the father primary residential parent should be affirmed. It carefully reviewed the evidence, including the 2012 altercation, and concluded that the lower court’s decision was well within the spectrum of reasonable rulings.
After addressing property and child support issues, the appeals court then turned to the question of spousal support. The wife argued that she was entitled to long-term support, rather than the three-year rehabilitative alimony. On this issue, the appeals court noted that trial courts generally enjoy broad discretion, and that decisions generally should not be second guessed.
It then noted that there is a preference for rehabilitative alimony, and that the relevant statute requires that the economically disadvantaged spouse be rehabilitated whenever possible. The wife did have a disability resulting from the broken leg, and the trial court had acknowledged that this required some rehabilitative alimony. But it also noted medical evidence showing that she would have a favorable prognosis after surgery, and that she would probably be able to resume skilled work after her recovery.
After examining this evidence, the appeals court concluded that there was ample evidence supporting the lower court’s findings. Accordingly, it affirmed the finding that rehabilitative alimony was the appropriate type in this case.
After addressing the issue of attorney fees, the Court of Appeals vacated part of the lower court’s opinion relating to child support, but affirmed it in most other respects, including the alimony award.
No. W2016-01602-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 17, 2017).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
To learn more, see Alimony Law in Tennessee.
