Cohabitation Means Alimony Ends for Ex-wife

Tennessee alimony modification case summary.

Brent Christopher Dishon v. Lisa Renee Dishon

The husband and wife in this Tennessee case were married in 2003 and had one child.  In 2014, the husband filed for divorce.  The case went to mediation, and the parties agreed to various issues, including alimony.  The husband agreed to pay $1,200 per month, which would terminate in the event the wife was cohabitating.

The husband later stopped paying alimony, and the wife brought him back to court to enforce the agreement.  The husband argued that his income had decreased, and also that the wife was cohabitating.  He argued that the cohabitation meant that the alimony obligation had ceased, and that in any event, his reduced income constituted significantly changed circumstances.

After a hearing, the trial court concluded that the husband’s reduced hours constituted a material change of circumstances, and that the wife had, indeed, been cohabitating with her boyfriend.  Nevertheless, the court held that the wife still had a need for alimony as the economically disadvantaged spouse.  It therefore ordered the husband to pay $500 per month.  After various postrial motions, the husband appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

The appeals court first noted that a settlement agreement is a contract by which the parties are bound.  However, in some cases, alimony obligations can be modified by a court.

In this case, the appeals court noted that the trial court would have discretion to change the award of rehabilitative alimony.  However, it zeroed in on the fact that the wife had agreed that alimony would cease should she cohabit.

In this case, the trial court had made a specific factual finding of cohabitation.  For this reason, the Court of Appeals held that it was error to make a determination of alimony.  Therefore, it held that alimony should have ceased as of the date of cohabitation.

The appeals court did note, however, that there was no finding as to the date that cohabitation began.  Since the husband might have been liable for alimony prior to that date, the Court of Appeals remanded the case for a determination.

After addressing some other post-trial issues in the case, the Court of Appeals remanded the case to the lower court.

No. M2017-01378-COA-R3-CV  (Tenn. Ct. App. Jul. 20, 2018).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Alimony Modification in Tennessee Law | How to Modify Alimony.