Myrtle Marie Stagner v. Lloyd Otis Stagner - Concurring

Case Number
E2003-00610-COA-R3-CV

I concur in the majority opinion. I write separately to further address the majority’s treatment of the Illinois farm. I agree with the majority that the use of the parties’ joint accounts – to which both parties contributed – to pay “real estate taxes, insurance premiums, repairs and maintenance on the farm” during the parties’ 19-year marriage is clear evidence that “each party substantially contributed to [the Illinois farm’s] preservation and appreciation.” See Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-4- 121(b)(1)(B). This means that the entire “increase in value [of the Illinois farm] during the marriage,” see id., is marital property. Obviously this does not end the inquiry, because the trial court on remand must decide how to make an equitable division of the marital property portion of the present value of the farm in the context of an overall division of the total marital property estate. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-4-121(c)(1)-(11).

Authoring Judge
Judge Charles D. Susano
Originating Judge
Chancellor Telford E. Forgerty, Jr.
Case Name
Myrtle Marie Stagner v. Lloyd Otis Stagner - Concurring
Date Filed
Dissent or Concur
No
Download PDF Version