Husband Must Pay Alimony After Wife’s Remarriage Because He Agreed To

Tennessee alimony modification case summary after over 30 years married.

Susan Hembree (Schumacher) Deluca v. Kerry James Schumacher

The husband and wife in this Davidson County, Tennessee, case were married for over 30 years before their 2008 divorce.  They signed a marital dissolution agreement that called for the husband to pay spousal support “as long as the wife shall live.”  The agreement specified that if the wife remarried, that the alimony would be reduced by an amount determined by a formula in the agreement.

The wife remarried in 2015.  In 2016, the husband filed a petition to terminate his alimony obligation, and asked for a refund of amounts paid since the remarriage.

The trial court agreed with the husband and terminated the alimony obligation.  This decision was based on a Tennessee statute that provides that “alimony in future shall terminate automatically and unconditionally upon the death or remarriage of the recipient.”  The trial court classified the alimony as being alimony in future, and therefore held that this statute applied.  The trial court also awarded the husband back a portion of what he had already paid.  The wife appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

The appeals court, in a decision penned by Judge Andy D. Bennett,  first noted that a marital dissolution agreement is a contract, and the rules governing contracts apply.   The husband argued, however, that the contract is not enforceable until approved by the court.  And when the court approved the contract, the obligation became alimony in futuro, and was thus subject to the statute.

The wife cited a 2012 case where a father had agreed to pay child support beyond the child’s 18^th birthday.  The court enforced this agreement, because it was outside the scope of the legal duty to pay child support up to that age.  The court also cited a number of other cases addressing analogous situations.

After examining these cases, the court concluded that the case was similar to that 2012 case.  By agreeing that alimony might continue after remarriage, the parties agreed that the statute was not applicable to their case.  Parties are allowed to contract for things that are outside the scope of statutes.  In fact, the divorce statutes encourage people to resolve cases by agreement.  Therefore, it agreed that the contract should be upheld.

The husband argued, despite this holding, that the agreement violated public policy and should not be enforced.  But the court cited a number of earlier cases essentially rejecting this same argument.

The appeals court also agreed that the husband’s obligation to pay insurance premiums continued.  Finally, since the agreement called for attorney’s fees, the court held that the wife was entitled to her fees in both the trial court and appellate court.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s ruling, and remanded the case for computation of the attorney fees.

No. M2019-00601-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar.  6,  2020).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Alimony Law in Tennessee.

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