Divorce Courts Must Find Facts Before Ruling on Classification

Tennessee case summary on property division classification in divorce.

Nicola Dalili v. Sam A. Dalili

The husband and wife in this Knox County, Tennessee, case were married in 2004 and had two children before the filing of their divorce case.  Their property included a parcel of commercial real estate in Louisiana.  While the divorce was pending, the wife filed a motion to set up a trust account to receive the business income from that property.  She later filed a contempt motion in which she alleged that the husband was trying to sell the property in violation of the automatic injunction.  The husband filed a motion asking for the immediate sale of the property.

A hearing was held in late 2018, and the trial court granted the husband’s motion, ordering an immediate sale.  An offer for $690,000 came in, and the court ordered the parties to accept it.  Each party was to receive $25,000, with the remainder placed in a trust account.

The parties settled most issues, and a trial was held on distributing the property.  The house was valued at $375,000, but the court found, without explanation, that about $64,000 was the husband’s separate interest.    The remainder of the assets were awarded, but again without explanation.  The wife appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

Regarding the sale of the commercial property, the wife argued that this was improper since the hearing was cut off before she was allowed to testify.  She conceded on appeal, however, that she couldn’t come up with a practical remedy, since the property had already been sold.  The appeals court agreed, and therefore held that this part of the appeal was moot.

The appeals court then turned to the husband’s separate interest in the house.    The court noted that civil procedure rules require the lower court to find facts specifically, even if not requested by a party.  It quoted an earlier case which held that simply stating the decision, without more, did not meet this requirement.  The normal remedy is to vacate the judgment and remand for proper findings.  The court held that this was appropriate in this case and followed that approach.

The court did not make an award of attorney’s fees.  It vacated the lower court’s judgment and remanded the case.

No. E2019-00371-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 10,  2020).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Property Division in Tennessee Divorce.