Wife Awarded $8K/Mo. Alimony in Futuro after 31 Years Married

Tennessee alimony divorce case summary after 31 years married.

Sima Khayatt Kholghi v. Reza Aliabadi

The husband and wife in this Davidson County, Tennessee, case both grew up in Iran.  The husband came to the United states in 1978 at the age of 17.  He went into business with his father selling rugs.  The wife was 19 when she moved to the U.S. about five years later.  Her parents owned a rug store in Denver where she occasionally worked.  They met in 1988 and had a religious marriage ceremony in Nashville.  They were legally married at the courthouse the following year.

The husband and his father expanded their business and constructed a manufacturing plant in Smyrna, Tennessee, where they manufactured non-slip rug pads.  The wife was never paid a salary, but occasionally worked for the business.  After she gave birth to a daughter, she stopped working at the store and remained a stay-at-home parent.  They had another child, a son, in 1997.

The husband handled all of the couple’s financial matters, and they eventually built a home valued at over $2 million.  The wife eventually suspected the husband of adultery, and filed for divorce in 2016.

The trial court, Judge Phillip R. Robinson, heard a motion regarding temporary support, and directed the husband to provide the wife a credit card with a limit of $15,000, but with the wife to charge no more than $7000 per month except in an emergency.

A four day trial was held in 2019, and many issues were decided, filling a 45 page order.  Among the issues decided was alimony.  The husband’s income was pegged at about $400,000 per year.  The wife had not been looking for a job, but the court set her earning capacity at between $17,000 and $19,000 per year.  The wife had claimed many expenses, but the lower court trimmed these down.  Ultimately, the lower court concluded that the wife was entitled to $8,308 per month alimony in futuro.    It also awarded the wife $40,000 in attorney fees and almost $30,000 in expert witness fees.

After some post-trial motions, the husband appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.  Among other things, he argued that the alimony and property division failed to properly take into account the parties’ separate property.

After discussing other property issues, the appeals court turned to the issues affecting alimony calculation.

In particular, the husband argued that the trial court had failed to take into account the wife’s interest in her mother’s home in Iran.  The wife had a one-third interest, and the husband’s attorney stated that there were reports that the property might have been worth $7 million.  The wife’s opinion was that it was worth about $850,000.  The husband noted that he sent an appraiser to the home, but they refused to let the appraiser in.

The trial court downplayed this asset, first because there was no appraisal.  In addition, the trial court noted that it would be impossible for the wife to transfer any assets out of Iran, even if the property were sold.

The trial court had also based its calculations upon the assumption that the husband would inherit his parents’ estate upon their death.  While there was no will, there was testimony by the husband that tended to support this assumption.

After considering the evidence on these points, the appeals court concluded that the trial court had not committed reversible error.  Therefore, it let these holdings stand.

The appeals court then looked at the amount of alimony.  Here, the husband had argued that the amount was excessive due to the amount of marital property that the wife had received.  But it also noted that the wife would need to use much of these assets to purchase a residence.

The trial court had found a great disparity in the parties’ earning capacities, and the appellate court agreed.  After extensively reviewing the evidence, the Court of Appeals affirmed the alimony calculation.

After addressing the attorney’s fee award, the Court of Appeals affirmed and remanded the case.

No. M2019-01793-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Sep. 18,  2020).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Alimony Law in Tennessee.