Divorcing Tennessee Wife Didn’t Like Exquisite Furnishings

Tennessee law case summary on dissipation and property valuation in divorce and family law from the Court of Appeals.

Terri Dunn v. William M. Dunn, Jr. – Tennessee divorce dissipation and property valuation

The husband and wife in this Tennessee divorce case were married for 38 years.  They had one child who was an adult at the time of their divorce.  During the marriage, the wife had worked as a nursing assistant.  The husband had been a sales manager for Johnson & Johnson, and later in the marriage had an import business, in which he travelled to Europe for many months at a time.  In 2009, the husband sold a roofing business and did not work after that time.  The husband testified that the proceeds of the sale were used to pay living expenses.

After trial, the lower court split the marital estate, awarded 40% to the husband and 60% to the wife.  The wife filed an appeal with the Tennessee Court of Appeals.  She raised various issues relating to the valuation of the property and the alleged dissipation of assets by the husband.

The appeals court first held that the overall percentage was proper in this case.  The wife argued that the trial court should have given her more credit for the husband’s alleged dissipation of assets.  But the trial court had already concluded that the husband had dissipated $200,000, and had taken this into account in the distribution.  Despite the wife’s claim that this amount was low, the appeals court concluded that the evidence supported the court’s finding.

The appeals court then turned to valuation of some particular assets.  There was some dispute as to the value of certain retirement accounts, but the trial court had accepted the value shown on recent account statements, and the appeals court held that this approach was proper.

The trial court valued the contents of the marital home at over $142,000.  The wife, however, argued that these furnishings were old and worn, and worth only $20,000.  The wife also suggested that if the property were valued at the higher number, then she was willing to let the husband have it, assuming he would be assigned the higher value.

The husband introduced evidence showing that the property was “exquisite.”  For example, he noted that the oriental rugs alone were worth over $35,000.  An antique appraiser, Jerry Clements, had testified as to the value of the property, and the trial court had accepted his valuation.  The appeals court held that this was not error.

No. E2014-00706-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 22, 2014).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Tennessee Divorce Laws.