Marital Assets Divided Equally Despite Wife Bringing House to Marriage
Tennessee case summary on property division in divorce.
Tracy Marie Haltom v. Gregory Wayne Haltom
Marital Assets Divided Equally Despite Wife Bringing House to Marriage
The wife in this Rutherford County, Tennessee, case filed for divorce in 2017 after twelve years of marriage. There were no children, and neither party asked for alimony. They agreed to the division of many assets, but were unable to reach a decision as to others. Therefore, the case went to trial, and the case was heard by Judge J. Mark Rogers.
The wife’s salary was about $200,000, while the husband earned between $70,000 and $80,000 per year. In 1999, the wife had purchased a house, and the husband moved in two years before the marriage. They maintained separate bank accounts, and the wife made all of the mortgage payments on the house. The husband contributed to the maintenance by doing lawn work, creating a pond, and other maintenance tasks. That house was sold during the marriage, and the equity was used to purchase a new home in both names. The wife paid most bills for that property, although the wife conceded that the husband had paid one utility bill of $61.72.
During the marriage, the parties purchased a 20 acre parcel and constructed a weekend cabin. While the house was in the wife’s name alone, this parcel was in both names. The wife made most of the payments involving this property.
The wife was granted a divorce on the grounds of inappropriate marital conduct. The court held that both the house and cabin had been transmuted into marital assets, and divided the property accordingly.
The wife appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals and argued that the trial court erred in classifying the property as marital and dividing it equally.
After reviewing the definitions of marital and separate property, the appeals court turned to the facts of the case.
The wife argued that since the down payment was separate property, it should have remained such. She cited a number of earlier cases that she argued supported her position. But the appeals court found that there was much more than the down payment involved in this case. It noted that the husband lived there for many years, and that the down payment did not originate from some isolated asset of the wife. For these reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling that there had been transmutation.
The court then reviewed whether an equal division was appropriate. After analyzing the evidence relied upon by the lower court, it concluded that it was.
For these reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the lower court.
No. M2019-02261-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 10, 2021).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
To learn more, see Property Division in Tennessee Divorce.
