Wife’s House Held Marital Property Once Titled in Both Parties’ Names

Tennessee case summary on transmutation of property in divorce.

Samuel Jace England v. Amber Leigh Lowry

The husband and wife in this Cumberland County, Tennessee, case were married in 2014 and had one child before they both filed for divorce in 2017.  In December of that year, the wife was granted temporary possession of the home and both parties were awarded equal parenting time.  Since the regular judge was not present in court at the time of trial, the matter was heard by attorney Brett A. York, acting as a special judge.

The parties owned two houses, one of which was owned by the wife prior to the marriage.  During the marriage, she had put it in both of their names.  The court held that the house had transmuted into marital property due to how it was titled, and the substantial contributions by the husband during the marriage.  After other issues were decided, the wife appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.  She first argued that the special judge lacked authority.  She also argued that the property should not have been transmuted.  Instead, she argued, the house should have been her separate property.

The appeals court first turned to the issue of the special judge’s authority.  A Tennessee statute governs the appointment of a special judge in the case of a judge’s absence.  Normally, this should be another judge or a retired judge, but if one of those persons is not available, it can be a lawyer on a list previously approved by the judges of the county.

In this case, the appeals court found that the wife had not objected prior to the appeal.  For this reason, the issue was waived, and the appeals court instead turned to the transmutation issue.

The wife argued that her funds had been used to pay for renovations.  However, the husband testified as to the physical labor he had performed on the property.   In addition, the appeals court noted that when property is titled in both names, there is a presumption that it was a gift to the marital estate.  In this case, the wife had not rebutted this presumption, the appeals court held.  After reviewing the evidence, the appeals court agreed that the property was properly considered to be marital.

The court also reviewed other aspects of both the property division and parenting arrangements, and found no error in how the lower court had determined these issues.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s judgment.

No. E2019-01660-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. July 29,  2020).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Transmutation in Tennessee Property Division Divorce Law.