Cheating TN IRS Tax Examiner Husband Pays $1,500 /mo Alimony in Futuro
Tennessee alimony law case summary following 18 years of marriage. Tennessee divorce and family law from the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
Dottie Diana Slaughter v Henry Slaughter, Jr. – Tennessee Alimony Laws – 18 years married.
In an appeal, the court took action to settle the claim by the husband that the wife did not deserve alimony. The lower court ruled the wife, Dottie Slaughter divorced from the husband, Henry Slaughter, without appointing fault in the matter. The court awarded alimony in futuro for $1,500 per month and required the husband to pay health insurance and alimony in solido of the attorney’s fees. The husband appealed this decision.
The parties married in 1983. They met in 1973 and had a child in 1978. They separated in 1999 and the wife filed for divorce in June of 2000 alleging irreconcilable differences and inappropriate marital conduct, as well as cruel and inhumane treatment and abandonment. The matter was heard in court in April of 2007, which ended the marriage of 24 years.
At the time of the trial in 2007, the wife was 48 years old and the husband was 49 years old. The wife suffered from bipolar disorder and depression. As a full-time waitress, the wife earned $1,500 per month. The husband earned $8,250 per month as a tax examiner with the IRS. After the three-day trial, the court declared the parties divorced and ordered the payment of alimony in futuro of $1,500 per month.
The husband disputed the award of alimony as well as the division of property in this case. According to the husband, the lower court awarded the wife 95 percent of the property in addition to alimony, which he believed to be excessive. He also noted the trial court failed to credit him for pendente lite spousal support payments. The wife claims the income disparity, the costs incurred, and the amount of income retained by the husband during the seven years the divorce was pending warrant the action. She noted that the husband earned $721,778 to support himself and his paramour.
The appeals court ruled that the husband failed to demonstrate how the division of property was inequitable since no Rule 7 brief showing how the property division occurred was submitted with the appeal. The husband failed to demonstrate how the trial court abused its discretion in this matter.
On the topic of alimony, the trial court awarded alimony in futuro rather than rehabilitative alimony, according to the husband and he noted the amount provided was excessive. The husband believes the wife was capable of supporting herself even though she suffers from undisputed health problems and does not have an advanced level of education or work experience. She earned $1,500 at the time of the trial per month. The trial court found that the wife was disadvantaged in comparison to the husband and the wife’s income fell below the poverty level. It noted that the husband’s capacity to earn income was four to five times that of the wife’s. As such, and due to the lack of other information to support his claim, the appeals court upheld the awarding of alimony at $1,500 per month.
No. W2007-01488-COA-R3-CV, May 8, 2008.
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
To learn more about alimony, read Tennessee Alimony Law in Divorce | Answers to FAQs. Also, see the MemphisDivorce.com Tennessee Family Law Blog and its Alimony 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. Contact an attorney today at (901) 683-1850.
