Tennessee divorce case abstract.
The husband and spouse on this Davidson County, Tennessee, case had been married in 2002 and had no kids. It was the husband’s second marriage and the spouse’s first. The spouse filed for divorce in 2016, alleging amongst different issues an try on her life.
The husband was incarcerated on prices of soliciting the spouse’s first diploma homicide. He requested for a keep of the divorce continuing till the prison case was resolved. He argued that in an effort to reply to the spouse’s allegations, he would wish to decide on between his proper to confront his accuser and his proper towards self-incrimination. Whereas the case was pending, the husband was charged once more with solicitation of homicide.
The divorce case was assigned to Choose Philip E. Smith, and the husband additionally moved to have Choose Smith recused, on the grounds that he was charged with soliciting the homicide of his judicial colleague, the decide within the prison case.
Choose Smith denied all the motions. He first famous that the husband was mistaken, and he was not charged with soliciting the homicide of the prison decide. As a substitute, he was charged with soliciting the homicide of the primary alleged hitman.
Not surprisingly, the spouse was granted a divorce on the grounds of inappropriate marital conduct. The trial court docket labeled and divided the marital property, however denied the spouse’s request for alimony and legal professional charges.
The husband then filed a professional se enchantment with the Tennessee Court docket of Appeals. Although the spouse identified that his transient was very poor, the appeals court docket addressed all the points he raised.
The husband first argued that the trial court docket ought to have lifted the automated injunction in order that he might use marital belongings to safe his bond. After analyzing the details, the appeals court docket held that this argument was with out advantage.
The husband additionally argued that the trial court docket ought to have stayed the case whereas the prison prices had been pending. However after reviewing the details, the appeals court docket held that the decrease court docket had acted inside its discretion in permitting the case to proceed.
As to the recusal movement, the appeals court docket held that the husband had not demonstrated any bias or prejudice. Due to this fact, there was no error in denying the movement.
The husband additionally argued that the classification and division of marital property was improper. Right here, nevertheless, the appeals court docket held that the problem was not correctly preserved. Particularly, the husband had failed to offer a correct assertion of proof describing the precise points raised. With out this, the Court docket of Appeals wanted to uphold the decrease court docket’s ruling.
For these causes, the Court docket of Appeals affirmed the decrease court docket’s ruling and taxed the prices of enchantment towards the husband.
No. M2020-00314-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 2, 2020).
TN divorce case doesn’t go nicely for husband accused of making an attempt to kill spouse.
See authentic opinion for actual language. Authorized citations omitted.
To be taught extra, see The Tennessee Divorce Process: How Divorces Work Start to Finish.