Long Tennessee Legal Battle in Divorce over What else? The Home and Money
Tennessee law case summary on property classification and child support in divorce and family law from the Court of Appeals.
Harold Dean McDaniel v. Kimberly Ruth McDaniel — Tennessee divorce, child support, and property classification law
Harold Dean McDaniel (“husband”) sued Kimberly Ruth McDaniel (“wife”) for divorce in the Circuit Court for Hamilton County (“the trial court”). After a long and contentious legal battle, including an earlier appeal and remand for a new trial, the trial court entered its supplemental final decree of divorce. Wife appealed and raised a number of issues.
Husband sued wife for divorce in January 2007, and alleged wife was guilty of inappropriate marital conduct. Numerous hearings were conducted over the course of more than a year. In December of 2008, the trial court granted husband a divorce. Wife appealed, and the court of appeals affirmed the judgment of the trial court with respect to its having awarded husband a divorce on the basis of wife’s inappropriate marital conduct.
The McDaniels were married in 1997. Wife had three children from a previous marriage, and wife and husband had three children during their marriage. Wife admitted that she had a brief affair, but alleged sexual abuse by husband against one of the children. The trial court blamed wife for prolonging the litigation and found her claims of sexual abuse against husband to be unfounded.
One of the issues on appeal concerned the marital home and wife’s contributions towards it. The marital residence was purchased with funds contributed by wife from the sale of her house owned before the marriage. Wife testified that she and husband agreed that her money used for the marital residence would belong to wife separately. Husband disagreed on this point. In December 2011, the trial court entered its supplemental final decree of divorce, finding and holding in relevant part: 1) wife was to pay $960.00 in child support per month, with an arrearage of $44,630.00; 2) wife was ordered to pay guardian ad litem fees of $5,875.14. Wife appealed. .
Wife raised several issues on appeal, among which were: (i) whether the trial court erred in not giving wife credit for the contribution she made to the purchase of the parties’ marital home with her pre-marital assets; and (ii) whether the trial court erred in its computation of child support.
The court of appeals addressed giving wife credit for the contribution she made toward the purchase of the parties’ home with her pre-marital assets. It explained that Tennessee is a “dual property” state because its domestic relations law recognizes both “marital property” and “separate property.” As a result, the parties, the trial court, or both must identify all of the assets possessed by the divorcing parties as either marital or separate so that a proper division is made. Because trial courts are in a better position than an appellate court to observe the demeanor of the witnesses, the weight, faith, and credit to be given witnesses’ testimony, where issues of credibility and weight of testimony are involved, the court of appeals said it would give deference to the trial court’s factual findings. However, it said that the trial court’s conclusions of law are not accorded any presumption of correctness.
Wife argued that she should have been given credit for $83,613.71 in premarital assets she paid as a down payment on the parties’ marital home due to the fact that her earning power was less than husband’s. The evidence in the record on appeal did not preponderate against the trial court’s finding of transmutation or its division of the marital property as being equitable.
The child support history of this case was described by the court of appeals as long and winding. In the 2008 order, the trial court explained how wife’s child support arrearage would be calculated: the trial court took the difference in the child support calculations of the plaintiff ($1,031.00) and defendant ($888.00) using the midpoint number to determine child support arrearage from October 2007 to the present. The midpoint amount for child support was $960.00 per month and the wife owed $9,600.00 from October 24, 2007 thru July 28, 2008 and continuing at $960.00 a month until further ordered. However, the child support worksheet submitted was inconsistent with the figures mentioned by the trial court in its order. Wife also asserted on appeal that the trial court was mistaken as she did not submit a worksheet. In January 2009 prior to the remand, wife petitioned for modification of child support, citing changed circumstances. The court of appeals said that given the inconsistent worksheets in the record, it lacked the information to properly review the child support determination. The child support worksheet is required to be included in the record, and none of the worksheets in the record was consistent with the trial court’s child support determination. “As reluctant as we are to prolong this controversy,” the appellate court vacated the trial court’s judgment as to child support and remanded the issue.
The court of appeals said that it appeared from the record that the trial court considered the conduct of wife’s father in making wife totally responsible for guardian ad litem fees. Wife’s father was not a party on appeal, and allegedly had engaged in an outburst against the guardian ad litem after court which resulted in a contempt charge (which was subsequently dismissed). With the trial court’s reasoning on this issue relying so seemingly significantly on this dismissed charge of contempt against wife’s father, the appellate court found it inappropriate for wife to shoulder the entire guardian ad litem fee and ordered that it be paid in equal amounts by wife and husband.
No. E2012-00007-COA-R3-CV, 2013 WL 362830 (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 30, 2013).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
The Miles Mason Family Law Group handles Tennessee divorce, child support, alimony, child custody, and parent relocation. Download our free e-Book, Your First Steps: 7 Steps Planning Your Tennessee Divorce. A Memphis divorce lawyer from the Miles Mason Family Law Group can help. To schedule your confidential consultation, call us today at (901) 683-1850.
