Tennessee law case summary on income determination and deductions for depreciation for capital expenditures in Tennessee divorce and family law from the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
Ely v. Ely – Tennessee Child Support Case Summary – Trucking Company Owner
Suzanne and Kenneth Ely were divorced in 1988. They entered into a marital dissolution agreement (MDA) which provided that Mr. Ely would purchase the wife’s interest in a trucking business they jointly owned and operated.
After the divorce, Mrs. Ely filed contempt proceedings on three separate occasions against Mr. Ely for failure to comply with the MDA. Each of the three petitions alleged Mr. Ely had failed to pay his share of the medical expenses for the children, but the third petition also alleged that there had been a material and substantial change in circumstances since the divorce which justified an increase in Mr. Ely’s child support. Mrs. Ely claimed that he was self-employed at the time of the divorce as the sole owner of Ely Trucking Company. His business and income increased since that time. Mrs. Ely alleged she was entitled to an increase over and above the guidelines due to the fact that Mr. Ely had vested with the parties’ children less than the amount provided by either the guidelines or the final decree of divorce. Continue reading →
Tennessee law case summary on child support in Tennessee divorce and family law from the Tennessee Court of Appeals dealing with deductions from income for captial expenses and depreciation for self-employed business owners.
Tennessee considers deductions from income for captial expenses and depreciation for self-employed business owners.
Kimble v. Kimble – Tennessee child support laws
Nina and Michael Kimble were married in 1985 and divorced in 1992. When they married, Mrs. Kimble had a son from a previous marriage, and Mr. Kimble had a daughter. Mr. Kimble adopted the son, but his ex-wife did not adopt the daughter. The divorce decree incorporated the terms of a marital dissolution agreement (MDA) which provided that Mr. Kimble would pay child support of $250 monthly for 24 months. At the end of that time, the trial court stated that it would not be necessary for Mrs. Kimble to show a material change of circumstances when petitioning for an increase in child support, because Mr. Kimble had begun a new business and his income was uncertain at the time of the decree. Continue reading →