Property Classification Waived: Key Document Missing From Record

Tennessee alimony divorce case summary after 6 years married.

Donna L. Stearns-Smith v. James Ronnie Smith

The husband and wife in this Bedford County, Tennessee, case had been married for five years at the time of their 2015 divorce.

The case was heard by Judge Franklin L. Russell, and the parties were able to agree to many issues.  The case went to trial on the division of real property and the wife’s request for alimony.

Prior to their marriage, the husband had told the wife that he planned to retire soon to Alabama, and the parties began disposing of much of their Tennessee property.  While illnesses in the wife’s family delayed the move to Alabama, the parties did spend about $183,000 on the Tennessee home previously owned by the wife.  She ultimately sold the property, after the separation, for $455,000.

At trial, the husband argued that this property had been transmuted into marital property.  The lower court, however, held that the husband had not met the burden of proof, and that the property was the wife’s separately.  Therefore, he was not entitled to any of the increase in value.  A lake home in Alabama, however, was treated as marital property and divided.  The lower court also awarded the wife $85,000 alimony in solido, and awarded her attorney’s fees.  The husband appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

The appeals court turned first to the classification of the property.  However, the stipulation that both parties relied upon in the case was not part of the record on appeal.  Under those circumstances, the Court of Appeals held that the issue as to classification was waived.  It did allow the husband to argue one issue, namely the correction of a mathematical error in valuation.  But the Court of Appeals held that it was unable to address the main issue of classification.

On the issue of alimony, the Court of Appeals held that the lower court acted within its discretion.  The husband pointed out that the trial court had referred to the marriage as being seven years, when it was really only five and one half years.  But the appeals court noted that the duration from the wedding to the final decree was almost seven years, and it was appropriate for the lower court to use that as the measuring stick.

Upon a review of the evidence, the Court of Appeals affirmed the alimony award.  It did correct the mathematical error, and remanded the case.

No. M2017-01902-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Jul.  31,  2019).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Alimony Law in Tennessee.