Physician to Pay Lawyer Alimony $3.5K/Mo. After 17 Years Married
Tennessee alimony divorce case summary after 17 years married.
Nathaniel J. Lee v. Amber F. Lee
Physician to Pay Lawyer Alimony $3.5K/Mo. After 17 Years Married
The husband in this Washington County, Tennessee, case was a physician, and the wife was an attorney. The husband was the primary breadwinner, and the wife had a small part-time practice in which she often provided services pro bono.
When they divorced after 17 years of marriage, the wife’s earning capacity was the most hotly contested issue. The wife remained the primary caregiver for the children who were six and eight. The husband took the position that the wife was underemployed and had an earning capacity of $4000 per month.
The husband conceded that the wife was entitled to alimony, but they weren’t able to come to terms as to the amount. The husband argued that $1431 per month would be appropriate, but the wife argued for a higher amount. After deciding the other property issues, the trial court found that the wife was the economically disadvantaged spouse and that rehabilitation was not feasible. Accordingly, it awarded her $3500 per month. The husband appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals, raising a number of issues, including the correctness of the alimony award.
After addressing the property settlement issues, the appeals court turned to the question of alimony. It noted that this decision is always fact intensive and involves the balancing of many factors.
The husband argued that the lower court erred in awarding alimony in futuro. Instead, he took the position that the wife could be rehabilitated and that rehabilitative alimony was called for. The husband pointed out that the wife was a highly skilled attorney and had skills to grow her practice. But the court pointed out that there was no evidence that she could ever make enough money for a lifestyle comparable to what she had during the marriage. It also pointed out that she spent most of the marriage supporting the husband and his career by being a stay-at-home mother. And even with an optimistic view of her future earnings, the husband was still projected to earn nine times as much.
The appeals court also found that the trial court had appropriately considered the husband’s fault in the demise of the marriage. The lower court had found that there had been physical and verbal abuse, and that the husband had dissipated marital funds.
After reviewing all of the evidence of the wife’s needs and the husband’s ability to pay, the appeals court found that the lower court’s award was appropriate.
After reviewing the issue of attorney’s fees, the appeals court affirmed the lower court in all respects. It also awarded the wife her attorney’s fees for the appeal and remanded the case to compute the amount. The court’s opinion was authored by Judge W. Neal McBrayer.
No. E2019-01653-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 28, 2021).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
To learn more, see Alimony Law in Tennessee.
