Tennessee Husband’s Lifestyle Leads to Jail for Failure to Pay Alimony

Tennessee alimony law case summary on enforcement and contempt law from the Court of Appeals.

Patricia Gay Patterson Lattimore v. James S. Lattimore, Jr. – Tennessee divorce alimony contempt.

The husband and wife were divorced in 1994.  The divorce decree incorporated a marital dissolution agreement calling for the husband to pay alimony in futuro of $4000 per month, to provide medical insurance, and to maintain all existing life insurance policies.

In 2009, the wife filed a petition asking to hold the husband in contempt.  It alleged that the husband had missed one alimony payment and had stopped providing medical insurance.  The husband claimed that he had been forced to retire due to his health, and that he was no longer able to meet the alimony obligation, or to provide insurance, which had previously been provided through his employer.

The wife produced a letter in which the husband had threatened to transfer his assets to his new wife, and she alleged that he had done so.

In 1993, the husband had purchased a rundown property and restored it.  He sold that property in 2003 for $2.35 million, resulting in a profit of $1.6 million, which he admitted that he transferred to his new wife.  Part of the profit had also been used to purchase the home in which the husband lived with his new wife.  He had initially been on the title of the property on which the house was located.

The trial court found that the husband was not a credible witness.  It found him guilty of 70 counts of criminal contempt for failure to pay alimony, medical insurance, and to maintain life insurance.  It awarded the wife a judgment of $157,800 for alimony, $8000 for medical insurance, and almost $12,000 in attorney fees.  The trial court sentenced the husband to 30 days in jail, but stayed the sentence to give husband the opportunity to pay the judgment.  The husband appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

The husband first argued that he didn’t have sufficient notice of the charges against him.  The Court of Appeals agreed, because the husband was only notified of three charges against him, rather than the 70 for which he was convicted.  Therefore, the Court of Appeals reversed the remaining 67 charges.  However, the Court of Appeals noted that the trial court had actually sentenced the husband to three sentences of ten days each, so the sentence was not affected by the reversal.

The husband also argued that the stay of the sentence for him to comply was improper, because criminal contempt should not be used to coerce compliance.  The Court of Appeals disagreed.  The Court likened the situation to a suspended sentence, which it held was proper.

The husband also argued that the evidence was insufficient.  The Court of Appeals disagreed, and noted that there was sufficient evidence to show that the husband’s conduct was willful.  The court took particular note of the transfer of assets to his current wife, and his setting up a shell corporation of which the new wife was the sole owner.  In fact, the husband had explicitly stated that he would transfer the assets.  The Court of Appeals also noted that the husband and his new wife enjoyed an “extravagant lifestyle,” even after claimed financial troubles.  They traveled extensively and had an extensive wine collection.

Finally, the Court of Appeals held that the award of attorney fees was proper.  In fact, the Court of Appeals also awarded the wife her attorney fees on appeal, and remanded the case for a determination of the amount.

No. M2012-02674-COA-R3-CV (Tenn.Ct. App. Oct. 24, 2013).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, read Tennessee Alimony Law in Divorce | Answers to FAQs.  Also, for legal updates, news, analysis, and commentary, see our Tennessee Family Law Blog and its Alimony category.  A Memphis divorce lawyer from the Miles Mason Family Law Group can help.  To schedule your confidential consultation, call us today at (901) 683-1850.