Corbin Dale Meador v. Linda J. Meador

CourtCourt of Appeals of Tennessee
DecidedJune 6, 1997
Docket03A01-9612-CV-00405
StatusPublished

This text of Corbin Dale Meador v. Linda J. Meador (Corbin Dale Meador v. Linda J. Meador) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Corbin Dale Meador v. Linda J. Meador, (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

I N THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

EASTERN SECTI ON FILED June 6, 1997

Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk CORBI N DALE MEADOR ) HAM LTON COUNTY I ) 03A01- 9612- CV- 00405 Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l a nt ) ) ) v. ) HON. ROBERT M SUM I TT, . M ) J UDGE ) LI NDA J . MEADOR ) ) De f e nda nt - Appe l l e e ) VACATED AND REMANDED

LAWRENCE W LSON OF NASHVI LLE FOR APPELLANT I

CHARLES D. PATY OF CHATTANOOGA FOR APPELLEE

O P I N I O N

Godda r d, P. J .

The c ont r ove r s y pr e s e nt l y on a ppe a l a t t a c ks a j udgme n t

e n t e r e d i n a pos t - di vor c e pe t i t i on f or c ont e mpt , whe r e i n Li nda J .

M a d o r s e e ks t o r e c ove r pr ope r t y s he c ont e nds wa s a wa r de d he r i n e

t h e d i v or c e de c r e e a nd t o f i nd he r f or me r hus ba nd, Cor bi n Da l e

M a d o r i n c ont e mpt of c our t f or r e f us i ng t o de l i ve r t he pr ope r t y e

t o he r . M . M a dor ' s a ppe a l c ont e nds t ha t t he i t e ms i n r e

q u e s t i o n, pr i nt s by a we l l - known Cha t t a nooga a r t i s t , Be n Ha mpt o n ,

we r e h i s s e pa r a t e pr ope r t y a nd we r e not a wa r de d t o he r by t he

d i v o r c e de c r e e . He a l s o i ns i s t s t he Tr i a l Cour t wa s i n e r r or i n

a wa r d i n g he r a t t or ne y f e e s whe n he wa s not f ound t o be i n

c o n t e mp t of c our t .

The pa r t i e s we r e di vor c e d by a f i na l j udgme nt e nt e r e d

o n Au g u s t 18, 1995, whi c h i nc or por a t e d t he i r pr ope r t y s e t t l e me n t

a g r e e me nt . As pe r t i ne nt t o t hi s a ppe a l , t he j udgme nt pr ovi de d

t h e f o l l owi ng:

3. De f e nda nt [ M . M a dor ] i s a wa r de d a l l s e h o us e hol d goods a nd f ur ni s hi ngs c ur r e nt l y i n he r pos s e s s i on, i nc l udi ng a l l hous e hol d goods a nd f u r ni s hi ngs a t t he Ga r de n Roa d hous e , t he f i ve ( 5) Be n Ha mpt on pr i nt s upon t he f i r s t hous e be i ng s ol d, 1 he r j e we l r y a nd c l ot he s a nd a ny i nt e r e s t pl a i nt i f f ma y ha ve i n s ai d pr ope r t y i s he r e by di ve s t e d out of pl a i nt i f f a n d ve s t e d i n de f e nda nt .

M . M a dor i ns i s t s t ha t t he pr i nt s i n di s put e we r e i n s e

t h e Ga r de n Roa d hous e a t t he t i me of t he e nt r y of t he de c r e e ( t h e

p a r t i e s owne d a not he r hous e whi c h t he y r e nt e d, l oc a t e d on

No r c r o s s Roa d) .

W c onc l ude a f t e r r e a di ng t he r e c or d t ha t i t i s not e

s u f f i c i e nt l y de ve l ope d t o ma ke a j udgme nt r e l a t i ve t he s t a t us o f

t h e pr i nt s , o t he r t ha n t he f i ve whi c h we r e c l e a r l y a wa r de d M . s

1 Th e p a r t i e s o wn e d t wo h o u s e s .

2 M a do r b y t he di vor c e de c r e e . e W r e a c h t hi s c onc l us i on be c a us e e

we h a v e f ound no pr oof t o s how t ha t t he di s put e d pr i nt s we r e a

p a r t o f t he hous e hol d goods a nd f ur ni s hi ngs of t he Ga r de n Roa d

h o u s e a t t he t i me t he de c r e e wa s e nt e r e d. Addi t i ona l l y, i t

a p p e a r s t ha t one of t he pr i nt s wa s i n t he pos s e s s i on of t he i r

da ught e r .

M e ove r , t he r e i s uni mpe a c he d t e s t i mony by The l ma or

Re n n e r , a c l os e f r i e nd o f t he a r t i s t , M . Ha mpt on, t h a t M . r r

Ha mp t o n ga ve he r ma ny of hi s pr i nt s , s ome of whi c h s he ga ve t o

M . M a dor i ndi vi dua l l y. r e

As a l r e a dy s t a t e d, we c onc l ude t ha t i t i s a ppr opr i a t e

t h e c a u s e be r e ma nde d f or f ur t he r pr oof r e l a t i ve t o t he pr i nt s ,

a nd a de t e r mi na t i on whe t he r t he y we r e i n f a c t a pa r t of t he

h o u s e h o l d goods a nd f ur ni s hi ngs of t he Ga r de n Roa d hous e a nd, i f

n o t , wh e t he r t he y r e ma i ne d t he s e pa r a t e pr ope r t y of M . M a dor . r e

I n c onc l us i on a s t o t hi s poi nt , we a r e a wa r e t he Tr i a l

Co u r t t hought t he de c r e e e nt e r e d on Augus t 18, a bove quot e d, 2 r e s o l v e d t he ma t t e r . Howe ve r , our de novo r e vi e w of t he r e c or d

p e r s u a d e s us ot he r wi s e , t hus pr ompt i ng our r e ma nd.

2 THE COURT: W l l , we ' d l i k e d t o h a v e a wi t n e s s t h a t i s r e l e v a n t . e Th e l a s t wi t n e s s wa s n o t r e l e v a n t b e c a u s e t h e p r i n t s we r e o r d e r e d i n t h e o r d e r t o b e d i s t r i b u t e d i n a c c o r d a n c e wi t h t h e o r d e r . I t d o e s n o t ma t t e r wh a t t h e s o u r c e wa s .

MR. MEADOR: Th e Co u r t wo u l d n ' t c ons i de r t hos e a s be i ng pe r s o na l gi f t s ?

THE COURT: Ab s o l u t e l y n o t , n o t t h e wa y t h e o r d e r s o s t a t e s . Th e y ' r e p a r t o f t h e f a mi l y . Se e , t h e r e a r e o t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n a d i v o r c e . Yo u d i v i d e e v e r y t h i n g u p ; a n d o n c e y o u d o , t h e n t h a t ' s t h e o r d e r o f t h e Co u r t .

3 Re ga r di ng t he s e c ond i s s ue que s t i oni ng t he a t t or ne y

f e e s a wa r de d, i n l i ght of our di s pos i t i on of i s s ue one , i t i s

u n n e c e s s a r y t ha t we a ddr e s s t hi s i s s ue a s i t ma y be r e s ol ve d b y

t h e Tr i a l Cour t ' s de t e r mi na t i on of t he f i r s t i s s ue upon r e ma nd .

For t he f or e goi ng r e a s ons t he j udgme nt of t he Tr i a l

Co u r t i s va c a t e d a nd t he c a us e r e ma nde d f or f ur t he r pr oc e e di ngs

n o t i n c ons i s t e nt wi t h t hi s opi ni on. Cos t s of a ppe a l a r e a dj ud g e d

o n e - h a l f a ga i ns t M . M a dor a nd one - ha l f a ga i ns t M . M a dor . r e s e

_______________________________ Hous t on M Godda r d, P. J . .

CONCUR:

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _________________________ He r s c he l P. Fr a nks , J .

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _________________________ Ch a r l e s D. Sus a no, J r . , J .

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Corbin Dale Meador v. Linda J. Meador, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corbin-dale-meador-v-linda-j-meador-tennctapp-1997.