TN Husband To Pay $10K/Mo. Alimony After Two Decade Marriage

Tennessee alimony divorce case summary after 20 years married.

TN Husband To Pay $10,000 Monthly Alimony After Two Decade Marriage

The husband and wife in this Montgomery County, Tennessee, case had been married for over twenty years at the time of their 2012 divorce. In 1992, they had divorced briefly but later remarried. The husband was the primary wage earner as a real estate developer, and the wife was a homemaker. The husband also owned shares in several real estate partnerships, and was half owner of a bail bond company. For the prior five years, his annual income had been over a million dollars, and his net worth was $10.4 million.

Much of the trial was spent valuing property, and featured the testimony of George Pritchett, the husband’s appraiser, and Michael Wallace, who testified as to the value of the real estate partnerships. The wife’s appraisers were Mark Young and Larry Sharp, and her expert with respect to the value of the partnerships was Scott Womack.

After valuing the properties, the trial court divided them, and then turned to the issue of alimony. The wife was 53 years old at the time, unemployed, with relatively little education, and with limited job experience. The trial court also noted that the husband had been awarded most of the income producing property, and he had an income of over a million dollars per year. For these reasons, the trial court awarded the wife alimony in futuro of $10,000 per month, finding that she was the economically disadvantaged spouse and incapable of rehabilitation. The court also awarded the wife her attorney and expert witness fees.

The husband appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals, and raised a number of issues regarding the property division. He also argued that the award of alimony and attorneys’ fees was inappropriate.

After addressing the property valuation and division, which the appeals court held was appropriate, it turned to the issue of alimony. It first noted that trial courts have broad discretion when it comes to alimony awards. It also noted that in exercising its discretion, the court must apply the correct statutory factors.

In this case, the appeals court focused on the disparity of earning capacity. It noted that the husband had consistently earned well over $600,000 per year, and that he retained all of the income-producing property after the divorce. It noted that he had both experience and business acumen which would compensate for the relatively minor loss of interest income he suffered from the divorce.

It contrasted the husband’s situation with that of the wife, who it found would be capable of little more than minimum-wage employment. While the wife received many assets in the divorce, the appeals court found that she would need to deplete them to maintain her style of living.

After carefully reviewing the evidence, the appeals court agreed with the trial court that the alimony award was appropriate. Similarly, it found that the award of attorneys’ fees was appropriate under the circumstances.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s ruling.

No. M2014-01835-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. May 12, 2016).

See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Alimony Law in Tennessee.