Doctor Must Pay $4K/Mo. Alimony to Wife Who Was Stay-At-Home Mom
Tennessee alimony divorce case summary after 22 years married.
Lisa Lyon Williams v. Lane Edward Williams
Doctor Must Pay $4K/Mo. Alimony to Wife Who Was Stay-At-Home Mom
The husband and wife in this Madison County, Tennessee, case were married in 1995, and had one child, who was an adult at the time of their divorce. When the couple met, the wife was a critical-care nurse, and the husband was completing his medical residency. After they married, they decided that the mother would stay at home to care for their child.
The wife’s nursing license expired, but she became and ordained minister in 2008. She served as an interim pastor, and later became an adjunct pastor at a seminary.
At the time of the divorce, the wife had moved to North Carolina. The wife filed for divorce on the grounds of irreconcilable differences and inappropriate marital conduct. The husband filed a counter-complaint for divorce alleging the same grounds.
The trial court found some fault on the part of both parties and granted the divorce. In particular, the husband was ordered to pay a total $9,000 as alimony in solido to cover the wife’s attorney fees. He was also ordered to pay $4,000 per month as alimony in futuro. The trial court also divided the couple’s property. The husband appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals, arguing that the alimony awards were incorrect.
The appeals court first noted that trial courts have broad discretion when it comes to spousal support awards, and it listed the factors to be employed by the lower court.
The trial court had noted that this was a long-term 22 year marriage, and the wife had devoted most of the marriage to being a stay-at-home wife and mother. The trial court also noted that the husband earned about 12 times more than the wife.
The appeals court reviewed the lower court’s findings and concluded that the trial court had properly considered the relevant factors. It noted in particular that the wife had put her career on hold and worked during the marriage to advance the husband’s career.
The appeals court also examined the award of attorney’s fees. It noted that the most important factors were the wife’s need and the husband’s ability to pay. After reviewing the record, it concluded that the trial court had acted properly in making the award it did.
The court then addressed some of the other property issues in the case. It then affirmed the lower court’s judgment. It did, however, deny the wife’s claim for attorney’s fees on appeal.
No. W2018-00800-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 26, 2019).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
