Stroke and Seizures Ends Tennessee Husband’s Alimony Obligation

Tennessee alimony termination law case summary. Divorce and alimony law from the Court of Appeals.

Greg Willet, As Executor of the Estate of Walter Taeubel, v. Lucy Adelaine Taeubel – Tennessee alimony termination, retirement

The husband and wife in this Hamilton County, Tennessee, divorce case were divorced in 2004 after 19 years of marriage, when they were both 77 years old.  The wife was awarded alimony in futuro of $1,500 per month.

In 2010, the husband made a motion to modify the alimony obligation on the grounds of a significant change in circumstances, since he had suffered a stroke.  As a result, he suffered seizures.  Up until that time, the husband had worked full time, but was no longer employed after the stroke.  His income had gone down from over $6,000 per month to about $3,500 per month, which included social security, pension, and IRA payments.  He also moved to a skilled nursing facility, which cost almost $8000 per month.  In 2012, a conservator was named for the husband.

After hearing all of the evidence, the trial court ended the alimony obligation as of 2014.  The wife then brought an appeal to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.  The husband died while the appeal was pending, but the court decided the case in order to resolve the issue of the amount of alimony due at the time of his death.

The appeals court first noted that alimony generally continues indefinitely, unless one party can establish a substantial and material change in circumstances.  The wife admitted that there had been a change of circumstances, but argued that it was not “material,” since it could have been anticipated at the time of the divorce.  She noted that his deteriorating health was caused by the husband’s voluntary alcohol abuse, which was known at the time of divorce.

But the appeals court noted that there was no medical evidence showing that the stroke was caused by alcohol use.

The appeals court carefully reviewed the trial court’s record, and concluded that the evidence did not preponderate against the lower court’s findings.  The wife argued that the husband’s voluntary use of alcohol was similar to a voluntary decision to retire.  But once again, the appeals court found that the husband had no choice but to stop working.  There was no indication that he had purposely done anything to defeat the wife’s alimony.  The appeals court also concluded that it would not be proper to impute to the husband income based upon his assets.

For these reasons, the court concluded that the change of circumstances was both material and substantial, and supported elimination of the alimony obligation.

No. E2014-00364-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 10, 2014).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, read Tennessee Alimony Modification Law | How to Modify Alimony in TN.