Tennessee case abstract on asset valuation and division in divorce.
The events on this Lincoln County, Tennessee case have been married in 2007 and had one son, who was born in 2016. When the spouse discovered that the husband was having an affair, she filed for divorce in 2020. The web marital property was divided nearly equally, and the everlasting parenting plan referred to as for the mom to be main residential dad or mum, with 235 days per 12 months parenting time. The daddy then appealed to the Tennessee Courtroom of Appeals.
Among the many belongings was a secret day buying and selling account maintained by the daddy, valued at $20,000. He didn’t embody this account in interrogatories, and was evasive when requested concerning the omission. The courtroom awarded this account to the daddy, however awarded the mom $10,000 for her share. On attraction, the daddy argued that the valuation was incorrect. He additionally argued that the account was owned collectively along with his girlfriend, and that solely his curiosity ought to have been thought-about. However upon inspecting the proof, the appeals courtroom discovered no error with the decrease courtroom’s ruling. The daddy additionally quibbled as to the worth of his automobile, however the appeals courtroom discovered that the decrease courtroom had pegged its worth correctly. It additionally affirmed the disposition to the mom of a hoop which had belonged to the daddy’s grandmother. They’d put it in a brand new setting and it was given to the mom. The appeals courtroom agreed that the ring was a present to the mom.
The daddy additionally argued that he ought to have obtained extra parenting time. The appeals courtroom first identified that it doesn’t usually second guess the trial courtroom, for the reason that ruling typically hinges on delicate elements corresponding to demeanor and credibility. The trial courtroom had utilized the statutory elements, and the appeals courtroom might discover no purpose to reverse the ruling.
For these causes, the Courtroom of Appeals affirmed, and assessed the prices of attraction in opposition to the daddy.
No. M2022-00140-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Could 2, 2023).
See unique opinion for actual language. Authorized citations omitted.
To study extra, see Property Division in Tennessee Divorce and consider our video Is Tennessee a 50 50 divorce state?