TN Wife’s Alimony Runs Out When She Lets Mother Move In
Tennessee alimony termination law case summary law from the Court of Appeals.
Jeffrey Wade Myrick v. Gloria Denise Myrick – Tennessee divorce alimony termination.
Jeffery and Gloria Myrick were divorced in Sumner County, Tennessee, in 2009. They engaged in mediation, and the result was a marital dissolution agreement that was approved by both parties and incorporated into the court’s decree. Among other things, that agreement provided that the husband would pay the wife alimony at the rate of $2,000 per month, until the either party died, the wife remarried, or “until a third person not the Wife’s child, moves into the Wife’s residence.”
In 2011, the husband went back to court to terminate the alimony obligation. He had learned that the wife’s mother had moved into the wife’s residence. He noted that, obviously, the wife’s mother was “not the Wife’s child,” and that his obligation under the agreement had thus ceased. The case was heard by Judge Tom E. Gray, who agreed with the husband and ruled that the agreement was a contract, and that under the contract, the husband’s obligation to pay alimony ceased. The court awarded the husband a judgment for overpayment of $34,000 for the time in which the case had been pending. The wife then appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
The wife argued that because the mother did not provide any support, that the trial court should not have terminated the alimony. She cited a Tennessee statute which sets forth the procedure to be used when a third party resides with the recipient of alimony.
But the Court of Appeals held that this statute was not applicable, because this was a case where the parties had agreed to terms that were different from those of the statute. Therefore, it held that the trial court had acted properly in treating the case as a normal contract case.
The appeals court then looked at the contract and concluded that it was plain and unambiguous, that both parties agreed to this term, and that they were both represented by lawyers at the time. It found that the only relevant issue was whether the mother had moved into the residence, and agreed with the trial court that she had.
For those reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s ruling.
No. M2013-01513-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Jun. 19, 2014).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
To learn more, read Tennessee Alimony Law in Divorce | Answers to FAQs. Also, for legal updates, news, analysis, and commentary, see our Tennessee Family Law Blog and its Alimony category.
