Assets of Retired TN Dentist Seeking Lower Alimony Must Be Considered
Tennessee alimony modification law case summary following 42 years of marriage. Divorce and alimony modification law from the Court of Appeals.
Deborah Evans Wilhoit v. Gary Dennis Wilhoit – Tennessee divorce alimony modification – seeking to reduce, lower or terminate alimony in Tennessee
Gary and Deborah Wilhoit were divorced in 2011 after 42 years of marriage. The husband, a dentist, was ordered to pay $4,500 per month in alimony. In April 2012, he sold his dental practice and filed a petition to terminate the alimony obligation as a result of a substantial and material change in circumstances. The Sumner County trial court, Chancellor Tom E. Gray, held that there had been a change of circumstances and that the retirement had been reasonable. However, the trial court also found that the wife had a need for alimony and the husband had an ability to pay. Therefore, the trial court refused to terminate or modify the alimony. The husband then appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
The appeals court began by noting that a party seeking to modify alimony must satisfy two requirements. First, they must show a material change of circumstances. Next, they must establish that a change is warranted. In making that determination, the court must consider the factors in the Tennessee statute.
The husband argued that the wife no longer had a need for alimony, since she lives with her mother, and had adequate funds to live on. On the other hand, he argued that his only income after the sale of his dental practice was social security. The husband also argued that because the wife was living with her mother, there was a presumption that the mother was receiving support from the wife, which would warrant a modification in alimony.
In this case, the wife had assets consisting of $88,000 in savings and over $61,000 in gold. The trial court had not made any findings regarding these assets, and the appeals court held that these assets should have been taken into account when determining whether there was a need for alimony.
For this reason, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s ruling and remanded the case for reconsideration. It directed the trial court to take the assets of both parties into account when making its determination. It also asked the lower court to determine whether the husband had made overpayments of alimony while the case was pending.
The Court of Appeals also declined to award the wife any attorney fees, either for the action in the lower court or on appeal.
No. M2013-01499-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Jun. 9, 2014).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
To learn more, read Tennessee Alimony Modification Law | How to Modify Alimony in TN.
