Legal Opinion

Robertson v. Robertson

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided April 4, 2002PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court 1

OPINION

2Opinion of the Court · HolderJanice M. Holder, J.

in which FRANK F. DROWOTA, III, C.J., and E. RILEY ANDERSON, ADOLPHO A. BIRCH, Jr., and WILLIAM M. BARKER, JJ., joined.

We granted this appeal to address the means for determining whether a disadvantaged spouse can be “rehabilitated” under § 36 — 5—101(d)(1) of the Tennessee Code Annotated. We hold that a trial court must consider all relevant factors in § 36 — 5—101(d)(1) to determine whether an economically disadvantaged spouse can be rehabilitated. Because the trial court properly applied the relevant statutory factors, we affirm the trial court’s award of alimony, as modified, in…

3Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bogan v. BoganTennessee Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Aaron v. AaronTennessee Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Crabtree v. CrabtreeTennessee Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Blaine v. BlaineCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1994
  5. Renfro v. RenfroAlaska Supreme Court · 1993

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

4Cited by12 opinions

  1. Gonsewski v. GonsewskiTennessee Supreme Court · 2011
  2. Bratton v. BrattonTennessee Supreme Court · 2004
  3. Larsen-Ball v. BallTennessee Supreme Court · 2010
  4. Perry v. PerryTennessee Supreme Court · 2003
  5. Broadbent v. BroadbentTennessee Supreme Court · 2006

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API