Wife Put Husband Through Med School Gets $7.5K / Mo. Alimony
Tennessee alimony divorce case summary after 13 years married.
Mihir Kishorchandra Patel v. Janki Anil Patel
The husband and wife in this Madison County, Tennessee, case were married in India in 2005. The wife was an American citizen at the time of the wedding, and the couple moved to the United States, where the husband later became a citizen. The husband filed for divorce in 2015. A trial was held in 2018, with a jury deciding the grounds for divorce. The jury found that both parties were guilty of inappropriate marital conduct, and the trial judge then heard the remaining issues in the case.
The husband was a full-time medical student when the couple married. The wife worked in the accounting department of a university in Atlanta, and earned $40,000 per year. The couple moved a number of times, living in Jackson, Tennessee, at the time of the divorce. At that time, the husband was a medical doctor and earned about $850,000 per year. The wife was not employed at that time.
The parties acquired significant wealth during the marriage. They purchased a home in Tennessee, and while the divorce was pending, the husband paid off the mortgage.
After hearing all of the evidence, the trial court divided the parties’ property and turned to the issue of alimony. It awarded the wife alimony in futuro in the amount of $7,500 per month, which would continue until her death, remarriage, or material change of circumstances. After some post-trial motions, both parties appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals. The husband argued that the alimony award was erroneous and she should not have been awarded any alimony. The wife, on the other hand, argued that the amount awarded was not adequate.
The Court of Appeals turned to the statutory factors regarding alimony, starting with the relative earning capacities and needs, and the parties relative education and training. On these points, the appeals court quickly agreed with the lower court’s resolution.
The court then turned to the duration of the marriage. The trial court had held that the 13 year marriage was “not a short term marriage,” and the husband disputed this finding. He instead argued that, even though it wasn’t long term, “perhaps it falls somewhere in the middle.”
But the Court of Appeals was in agreement with the lower court’s finding as to the significance of the duration. It cited earlier cases which supported the trial court’s ruling.
The appeals court also looked at the parties’ standard of living during the marriage and held that it supported the trial court’s findings.
Finally, the appeals court noted that the wife had made contributions to the marriage by being the sole wage earner while the husband was in medical school.
After examining all of the factors in detail, the Court of Appeals agreed with the lower court’s resolution of the case and affirmed the alimony award.
The wife requested an award of attorney fees for the appeal, but this request was denied.
No. W2018-00820-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 15, 2019).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
To learn more, see Alimony Law in Tennessee.
