Dad Stuck With Marital Debt and Support After Short Marriage

Fayette County, Tennessee Courthouse

Tennessee case summary on property division, custody, child support in divorce.

Sara Kelley Poole v. Ronald Ellis Kinslow

The husband and wife in this case had been married for less than four years when the wife filed for divorce in Wilson County, Tennessee.  It had been the wife’s first marriage and the husband’s fourth, and the couple had one child.  The husband was the primary wage earner, and the wife was a full-time caregiver for the child.

Even though the parties had few assets, they had considerable debt.  The husband worked in construction maintenance, but had entered the marriage with a large amount of debt.  The husband also had four children from previous marriages and had child support obligations for two children from the second marriage.  He also had a tax lien for over $946,000 and had failed to file a tax return in 2007.  A tax attorney was working on the case, but no payments had been made on the lien.

Even though the husband was earning about $75,000, the couple had financial woes.  In 2015, the state seized the balance of their joint bank account to satisfy the husband’s child support arrearage.  He was also fined over $12,000 for contracting work without a license.

The wife wanted to return to property management, a field in which she had worked before the marriage.  But she planned to remain a full time mom until the child started school.  Her expenses were much greater than her income, and she had no savings.

The case was heard by Judge Clara W. Byrd, who declared the parties divorced.  The majority of the marital debt was allocated to the husband, and the wife was awarded her attorney fees as alimony in solido.  The wife was named primary residential parent, with the husband receiving 80 days per year parenting time.  The husband was ordered to pay $181 per week in child support.

Acting as his own attorney, the husband appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.  He argued that the trial court erred in allocating the debt, setting the parenting schedule, and calculating child support.  The appeals court noted that trial court fact findings, because they are based on witness credibility, are given great weight.  In this case, the trial court had specifically held that the husband was not a credible witness.

The first issue the court considered was the allocation of marital debt.   The court examined the evidence.  In particular, it noted the lower court’s finding that the wife was not as successful as she would have been because of the marriage.  For these reasons, it affirmed the debt allocation.

The court next turned to parenting time.  The husband argued that equal parenting time would have been more appropriate.  But again, the appeals court held that the ruling depended on fact findings best left to the trial court.

Finally, the husband argued that his income had been miscalculated for child support purposes.  But the appeals court agreed that the lower court had properly considered voluntary underemployment in making its decision.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed.  It also awarded the wife her attorney’s fees on appeal.

No. M2018-00324-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 5, 2019).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Property Division in Tennessee Divorce.