Cohabitating Tennessee Woman Entitled to Share of Property After Split

Tennessee law case summary on partnership law in family law from the Court of Appeals.

Lasonya Morrow v. Ray Anthony McClain – Tennessee partnership not divorce

The man and this woman in this case lived together for six years but never married.  During that time, they worked together in a number of business ventures.  They bought a number of pieces of real estate in Nashville, refurbished some of them, and rented them out.  They built one house in which they lived.  The man subcontracted some of the work and did much of the labor himself.  The woman and her children also participated in the work, but the man disputed the magnitude of that work.  The whole project took about two years to complete.  When the construction was complete, they took out a mortgage, which paid off the existing loans and was also used by each of the parties to pay off various debts.  It was later refinanced, with only the woman signing the loan.  The man paid most of those payments on the new mortgage.

The relationship became strained, and in 2012, the woman filed a complaint in which she asserted that their relationship constituted a partnership, because they had pooled their labors and resources.  She asked the court to divide the partnership property.  The man argued that there had never been an agreement to share incomes and liabilities as business partners.  The trial court noted that the woman’s testimony was generally more credible, but declined to find that there was a partnership.  The trial court ruled that the man would remain the sole owner of his dry cleaning business and one of the rental properties.  However, the trial court also found that the woman had acquired an interest in the properties acquired during the relationship by virtue of her labor and financial contributions.  It then divided the properties, and determined that the woman was entitled to $50,000 for her share, to be paid in monthly installments of $500.  An appeal to the Tennessee Court of Appeals then followed.

The man argued that the distribution was inequitable, since the trial court had improperly valued the woman’s contributions.  The Court of Appeals noted that the trial court was in a better position to make these determinations, especially in light of its finding that the woman was the more credible witness.  Since the man was unable to point to any specific valuations that should have been changed, the Court of Appeals agreed with the trial court as to the valuation.  Therefore, it held that the trial court’s judgment was supported by the evidence.

For those reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court, and assessed the costs of the appeal against the man..

No. M2012-01915-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 29, 2013).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

Memphis divorce attorney, Miles Mason, Sr., practices family law exclusively and is founder of the Miles Mason Family Law Group, PLC.  Buy The Tennessee Divorce Client’s Handbook: What Every Divorcing Spouse Needs to Know, available on Amazon and Kindle.  To schedule your confidential consultation, call us today at (901) 683-1850.