House Marital Property Despite Being Bought Before Marriage

Tennessee case summary on classification in divorce.

Vernell Lynn Carptenter Lewis v. William Billy Lewis

The husband and wife in this Shelby County, Tennessee, case began dating in 1995.  They both had children from previous marriages.  While they were still dating, the wife purchased a four-acre property that included a residence.  About a year later, the husband moved in, and various improvements were made.  At one point, the parties signed an agreement agreeing to pay half the mortgage, utilities, and upkeep.  Eight months later, they were married.  Shortly thereafter, the husband quite his job, and the wife paid the mortgage with her earnings.  After ten years of marriage, both parties filed for divorce.  The trial court,

Judge Valerie L Smith, made various rulings, including ruling that the house was the wife’s separate property.  The husband appealed that issue to the Tennessee Supreme Court.  The appeals court first noted that the issue was a fact question which would be reviewed de novo, with no presumption of correctness.

The lower court had based its decision upon the fact that the wife owned the property during the marriage, had it in her name alone, and paid the mortgage and expenses during the marriage with her earnings.  But the appeals court pointed out that other factors should have been considered.

For example, the appeals court pointed out that the husband had performed several maintenance tasks.

Particularly important was the fact that the parties had used the property as their marital residence.  Also, even though the wife used her earnings to pay the mortgage, those were marital earnings.  At this time, the husband was attempting to start a business.  The fact that he was ultimately unsuccessful did not mean that her earnings were not part of the marital assets.

Since the property was a marital asset, the Court of Appeals held that the lower court would need to decide its disposition.  For that reason, it remanded the case to the lower court to equitably divide the entire estate.

The appeals court also reviewed a lower court order in which the husband had been granted sanctions against the wife’s attorney.  It affirmed that order.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded the case.  The appellate court’s decision was penned by Judge Frank G. Clement, Jr.

No. W2019-00542-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 11,  2020).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Property Division in Tennessee Divorce.