TN Ortho Surgeon Must Still Pay $9,000/mo Alimony in Futuro

Tennessee alimony modification law case summary following 30 year marriage. Tennessee divorce and family law from the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

William James Jekot v Pennie Christine Jekot – Tennessee Alimony Modification Law

In the divorce case of William Jekot and Pennie Jekot, the wife appealed the decision of a lower court substantially to reduce her alimony. She believed that following the 30-year marriage, there were no material or substantial changes of circumstances occurring. The parties divorced in 2005. The husband then filed for a petition to modify the alimony award due to the decrease in the husband’s income.

The appeal was the second one in this case. In the case, the parties’ property was divided nearly evenly with each getting $1.4 million worth of property. The wife was given rehabilitative alimony for five years in the amount of $15,000 per month for the first 12 months, $10,000 per month for the next 24 months and $5,000 per month for the final 24 months. The husband appealed this decision. The first appeal modified the alimony as alimony in futuro. This was because the wife was out of the workforce for 22 years and demonstrated a need for the funds. She was 55 at the time of the trial. In that case, the appeals court reduced the monthly payments to $9,000 per month based on the wife’s actual needs.

In October of 2008, the husband petitioned for a modification of alimony contending a substantial and material change of circumstances, stating his income dropped substantially. In 2010, this court reduced his alimony payments to $5,000 per month.

The wife’s appeal focused on whether or not such a change occurred. The trial court found the husband’s practice income as an orthopedic surgeon had decreased by one-third since the divorce. The wife contends this does not include all of the husband’s income. However, the appeals court noted that based on the husband’s income tax return from 2005 (with an income of $522,953 noted) and the income tax return from 2009 (with an income of $348,989 noted) there was a decrease. However, the income documents do not contain a record from 2004, the year prior to the divorce. The appeals court ruled that the income must be based on all forms of income not just from the practice.

The appeals court ruled that the husband’s income from all sources did not indicate he could not make the required alimony payments. The husband then noted his expenses have increased. The appeals court noted this was true because he was paying $108,000 a year in alimony, which is an expense he did not have prior to the divorce. This is the only expense change, though. The appeals court stated this argument was without merit.

The third concern was that the wife’s need for alimony was less. The appeals court also ruled that evidence did not show this. More so, the husband needed to show that this income was unanticipated and unforeseen when the alimony was established. As such, the appeals court ruled the modification of alimony was not just and reinstated the previous ruling that the husband is to pay $9,000 per month to the wife.

No M2010-02467-COA-R3-CV, October 25, 2011.

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more about alimony modification, read Tennessee Alimony Modification Law | How to Modify Alimony in TN.  Also, see the MemphisDivorce.com Tennessee Family Law Blog and its Alimony Modification category.

Memphis divorce lawyer, Miles Mason, Sr. practices family law exclusively and is the founder of the Miles Mason Family Law Group, PLC, which handles Tennessee family law matters including divorce, alimony, alimony modification, child support, and child support modification.  Download our free e-Book, Your First Steps: 7 Steps Planning Your Tennessee Divorce.