 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Fillmore v. Fillmore9/14/2000
This appeal arises from a dispute between Appellant Stephen Douglas Fillmore and Appellee Karen Leigh (Anderson) Fillmore regarding the terms of their divorce. The court issued a Final Decree of Divorce, divided the parties' marital property and debts, and awarded Ms. Anderson alimony in solido. In addition, the court awarded custody of the one minor child to Ms. Anderson and set a child support amount based on the appropriate guidelines. On appeal, Mr. Fillmore argues that the trial court erred in its valuation of certain marital property, improperly awarded alimony in solido, and failed to include as a marital debt a pre-marital debt of Mr. Fillmore. In addition, Mr. Fillmore argues that the trial court improperly calculated his child support obligation based on his current income. We affirm the ruling of the trial court.
Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed; and Remanded
David R. Farmer, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which W. Frank Crawford, P.J, W.S., and Alan E. Highers, J., joined.
OPINION
Stephen Fillmore and Karen Fillmore were married on June 1, 1985. During this marriage, they had one child, Hanna Leigh Fillmore, born in February, 1992. Mr. Fillmore filed for divorce in February, 1997 and a final decree was entered on September 22, 1999.
Prior to the parties' marriage, Mr. Fillmore owned and operated Fillmore Painting, a commercial painting business, as a sole proprietorship. In 1994, the assets of this business were transferred to Fillmore Construction, Inc., a corporation in which Mr. Fillmore and Ms. Fillmore each held fifty percent (50%) of the outstanding shares. In 1997, this corporation made a net profit of seventy-three thousand seven hundred and thirty seven dollars ($73,737) as well as providing salaries for both Mr. Fillmore and Ms. Fillmore in a total amount of thirty thousand nine hundred and seventy seven dollars ($30,977). However, as the result of several of the company's employees making workers' compensation claims, the required workers' compensation premiums increased to a point where it was no longer feasible for the corporation to continue operation. As a result, Mr. Fillmore convinced his mother to establish another commercial painting business which was named CBF.
CBF conducted the same type of painting services provided by Fillmore Construction, though it was to do a much lower rate of out-of-state work. Mr. Fillmore directed all CBF operations and received a salary of one thousand two hundred and twenty-two dollars ($1,222) per month, while his mother held all the required business licenses. CBF leased the now idle equipment from Fillmore Construction, Inc. and obtained Workers' Compensation Insurance for a much lower cost than Fillmore Construction could have under the circumstances. Lease payments of approximately thirty thousand six hundred dollars ($30,600) were paid by CBF to Fillmore Construction over the period of January 1, 1999 to July 15, 1999.
Prior to the birth of the parties' child, Ms. Fillmore was employed as a secretary and later an uncertified technician at a hospital. After their child was born, Ms. Fillmore left her employment against the wishes of her husband to stay at home with their daughter. During the final stage of her marriage, she also attended and completed a program for medical assistants, incurring student loans of approximately six thousand dollars ($6,000). Ms. Fillmore has yet to pass the qualifying examination which would allow her to seek employment as a medical assistant. In 1977, Mr. Fillmore purchased real property in Smith County with twenty-three thousand dollars ($23,000) borrowed from his fat
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Tennessee Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|