Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Kyle v. Kyle

Court of Appeals of Tennessee, Jackson

May 17, 2017

WINSTON KEITH KYLE
v.
JANICE GOMER KYLE

          Session April 25, 2017

         Appeal from the Chancery Court for Gibson County No. 21893 George R. Ellis, Chancellor.

         This is an appeal from a final decree of divorce. The trial court's final decree of divorce included a division of marital property but failed to adjudicate the issue of alimony. A subsequent order states that the parties "agreed that [Wife's] claim for alimony in futuro and rehabilitative alimony . . . are dismissed." The appellate record contains no transcript or statement of the evidence for our review as required by the Tennessee Rules of Appellant Procedure. Accordingly, we conclude that there was sufficient evidence to support the trial court's finding. Affirmed and remanded.

         Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed and Remanded.

          Janice Gomer Kyle, Tunica, Mississippi, Pro Se.

          Howard Freeman Douglass, Lexington, Tennessee, for the appellee, Winston Keith Kyle.

          Kenny Armstrong, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which Richard H. Dinkins and Arnold B. Goldin, JJ., joined.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION[1]

          KENNY ARMSTRONG, JUDGE.

         OPINION

         Appellant Janice Gomer Kyle ("Wife") and Appellee Winston Keith Kyle ("Husband") were married in November 2009. No children were born of the marriage. On November 12, 2015, Husband filed a complaint for divorce against Wife alleging inappropriate marital conduct and irreconcilable differences. On January 5, 2016, Wife filed an answer and counter-complaint for divorce, wherein she also alleged inappropriate marital conduct and irreconcilable differences. In her counter-complaint, Wife avered that she was disabled and asked the court to award her alimony in futuro, pendente lite support, and rehabilitative alimony. The trial court held a hearing and entered a final decree of divorce on July 15, 2016, granting the parties a divorce by stipulation. Husband was awarded the marital home and debt thereon. Wife was awarded $15, 000 from Husband's 401(k), and the court made a specific division of certain property. However, there was nothing in the final decree of divorce adjudicating Wife's request for alimony in futuro or rehabilitative alimony. Consequently, this Court entered an order on October 6, 2016, giving Wife ten days to obtain entry of a final judgment. On October 17, 2016, the trial court entered an order stating that the final decree of divorce reflected the parties' agreement on all issues pending before the court. The order further states that it was "agreed that [Wife's] claim for alimony in futuro and rehabilitative alimony . . . are dismissed." Wife filed a timely notice of appeal. Wife lists several issues for review in her brief, which we restate as follows:

1. Whether Ms. Kyle should be awarded damages because her attorney misrepresented her?
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in failing to award alimony in futuro or rehabilitative alimony to the Wife as the disadvantaged spouse?
3. Whether the trial court erred in failing to consider Ms. Kyle's contributions to the marriage including improvements made to the marital residence ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.