Super Lawyers 2020: Thank you Memphis Magazine for the Feature
- At December 29, 2020
- By Miles Mason
- In News
0
Thank you, Super Lawyers and Memphis Magazine for our feature in the December 2020 issue. Being selected again this year is a great honor. See Meet the Team to learn more about us.
Read More»Employment Not a Substantial Contribution to Family Business
Keyt v. Keyt, 244 S.W.3d 321 (Tenn. 2007) The husband and wife in this 2007 case were married in 1988. The wife did not work outside the home, and the husband was employed by a trucking company founded by his father. The husband had been employed by this firm prior to the marriage, and before […]
Read More»Discovery Deficiency Memo Training
https://youtube.com/watch?v=a9sK4sxNAL8Video can’t be loaded because JavaScript is disabled: Discovery Deficiency Memorandum Training (https://youtube.com/watch?v=a9sK4sxNAL8) A discovery deficiency memo is the backbone to every motion to compel discovery in divorce and more. This video is internal training for our family law attorneys and paralegals drafting a concise and useful memo to accompany the response to a review […]
Read More»Nonowner Spouse Fails to Prove Appreciation of Chiropractic Practice
Cutsinger v. Cutsinger, 917 S.W.2d 238 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995). Mr. Cutsinger owned a chiropractic practice as a sole proprietorship. He began the practice two years before he married. Days after the marriage, Mrs. Cutsinger began working at the practice as a licensed nurse. Mr. Cutsinger later became seriously ill with skin cancer and was […]
Read More»Premarital Property Remained Separate Property Despite Couple Securing Line of Credit
Luplow v. Luplow, 450 S.W.3d 105 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2014). Mary Lisa Gaston Luplow and Martin Luplow were married in 1983 and had two children. In 2010, the wife filed a complaint for divorce in Davidson County, Tennessee, alleging inappropriate marital conduct and irreconcilable differences. The husband filed a counterclaim, alleging the same grounds. After […]
Read More»Deadline Set for Walter Evans Chancery Court Bench Applications
- At December 20, 2020
- By Miles Mason
- In Uncategorized
- 0
At 9 a.m. on Tuesday, February 2, 2021, the Trial Court Vacancy Commission will hold a meeting in order to address filling the vacancy left by the Honorable Walter L. Evans upon his retirement from Chancery Court, Part I of the 30th Judicial District of Shelby County. Due to Covid-19, the hearing will be held virtually, […]
Read More»Causing Fire Doesn’t Count as a Substantial Contribution and Property Remains Other Spouse’s Separate Property
Ballard v. Ballard, No. M2008-00713-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 21, 2009). Before he met his future wife, Mr. Ballard purchased a home in his own name for $81,000. The same year he began dating Mrs. Ballard, he paid off the first mortgage on his home in full and obtained a second mortgage. After the parties […]
Read More»Dramatic Appreciation in Property Value Was Result of Freeway Coming Through and Not Spouse’s Substantial Contribution; Therefore Property Interest Remained Separate
Harrison v. Harrison, 912 S.W.2d 124 (Tenn. 1996). Mr. Harrison and his brother each inherited a half interest in a 45 ½ acre tract of land that was used for farming. At the time Mr. Harrison married Mrs. Harrison, the value of the land was $7,000. After an interstate was constructed across the tract of […]
Read More»Investment Advice and Use of Word “Ours” Were Insufficient to Transmute Wife’s Trust Fund
Luttrell v. Luttrell, No. W2012-02279-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 28, 2014). William and Beverly Luttrell were married in 1987 in Mississippi. The wife came from a well-to-do family, since her grandfather had started Bryan Foods, which later became part of the Sara Lee Corporation. Prior to the marriage, she was the beneficiary of a trust […]
Read More»Support During Marriage Was One Factor of Substantial Contribution When It Resulted in Preservation of Asset
Wade v. Wade, 897 S.W.2d 702 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994) This 1994 case involved a number of different pieces of property which the court was required to classify as separate or marital. These had been owned by the husband prior to the marriage, and the husband argued that they had remained his separate property. One […]
Read More»
