Divorce Property Division Must Account for Property in Nigeria
Tennessee case summary on property division and alimony in divorce.
Property division and alimony need to include parties’ property in Nigeria.
Augustina C. Durunna v. Nelson I. Durunna
The husband and wife in this Davidson County, Tennessee, case were originally from Nigeria, but married in Arkansas in 1998. They had children, starting with one born in 1999.
The wife was a nurse and served as the primary breadwinner for the family, although the husband had always done something to make a contribution to the support of the family. For example, he worked for Hertz Rental for a time, and operated an office cleaning business.
During the marriage, they family moved to Tennessee, where the wife filed for divorce in 2019. The trial court made its final order dividing property and awarding the husband alimony of $815 per month. The wife appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
The appeals court first found that the award of divorce was proper, and then turned to the valuation of the marital residence. But the appeals court found that the lower court’s valuation should be affirmed.
The wife pointed out, however, that the trial court had not accounted for all of the parties’ property. In particular, the wife alleged that the parties owned multiple properties in Nigeria, and that these properties were never addressed.
The appeals court cited an earlier case in which there was marital property located in the Gaza Strip. That case, in turn, relied upon a 1926 case which held that, even though a court did not have jurisdiction over a property in another jurisdiction, it could, nonetheless, enter an order requiring one party to transfer it.
The trial court had refused to rule because the evidence was so lacking that it was unable to make a finding of ownership by either party. But the appeals court pointed to one particular property that the wife claimed was owned, and that the husband apparently admitted to. Indeed, the husband had admitted to being a party to an eviction case with respect to that property. There was also evidence that this Nigerian property had been purchased with marital assets.
For this reason, the Court of Appeals remanded the case for the lower court to take this property into consideration.
Because of this change in the property distribution, the appeals court also ordered the lower court to reconsider the alimony award. It did deny the wife’s request for attorney’s fees on appeal.
No. M2022-00415-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 4, 2024).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
To learn more, see Property Division in Tennessee Divorce and view our video Is Tennessee a 50 50 divorce state?
