A Tennessee appeals court has upheld a trial court’s decision to value the marital home at $160,400 and award the wife 75% of its equity. In a ruling filed on October 27, 2026, the court rejected the husband’s challenge to the valuation and the division. The court found that the record supported the lower figure, even though the husband had offered comparable sales ranging from $310,000 to $350,000. The ruling did not settle everything, however. The court vacated the values assigned to his artwork and tools and sent the parenting plan back for new findings.
Two price tags for one home
The couple married in Texas in 2015 and moved to Knoxville, Tennessee, about a year later. The wife was the primary provider throughout their marriage. The couple welcomed their first child, a son, in July 2017. The child had autism and developmental delays. Five years later, they separated, and the husband filed for divorce in 2024. At trial, he valued the house at “slightly north of $300,000”. To support that figure, he pointed to three nearby homes that had sold for $310,000, $320,000 and $350,000.
The real value of the marital home
The couple bought the house, which was built in 1945, in 2018. They paid $109,000. The wife testified that it could be worth about $200,000, but only after major repairs to the heating system and roof. She also submitted photographs showing the condition of the home and other defects. The county property assessor had valued the house at $160,400.Following the separation, the husband insisted that the property was worth more. The trial court described his estimate as “greatly inflated” and noted that the comparable homes he cited were not truly comparable in size, condition or lot. The appeals court agreed that the record supported the lower figure. It also said that a judge does not err simply by believing one side over the other, as long as the final value falls within the evidence presented.Based on these findings, the wife was awarded 75% of the equity. The total equity in the marital home came to $62,852.84, meaning the wife would receive $47,139.21. The husband’s 25% share was approximately $15,713.21.The state’s law requires courts to weigh each spouse’s contributions, including work as a homemaker, wage earner or parent. The statute says those roles count equally, but only if both spouses actually fulfilled their responsibilities. The trial court found that the wife worked throughout the marriage and was the main caregiver for their son, who has significant developmental needs. It also found that the husband handled homemaking duties for only about four years. The court heard testimony about occasions when his drinking left the child unsupervised. The appeals court said the record did not contradict those findings.The husband also owed about $20,000 in back child support, and a magistrate had set a repayment plan of $55 a month, which would have taken more than 30 years to complete. The trial court ordered the debt to be paid in full from his share of the marital estate. The husband argued that the court could not change the payment plan because neither side had appealed it. However, the appeals court rejected that argument. It explained that the judgment fixed the total amount owed, while the payment schedule only governed how quickly he had to pay it. It is not unusual for courts to change the schedule, especially when it becomes unreasonable.The ruling should not be considered a clean win for either side. The appeals court vacated the trial court’s $2,000 valuations for the husband’s original artwork and tools because neither party had offered evidence of their value. The trial court must now exclude those values from the property division and recalculate each spouse’s share. The court also vacated the permanent parenting plan. Its order did not explain how it weighed the child’s best interests or why the restrictions on the husband’s visits were necessary. The appeals court said it could only guess at the reasoning and declined to simply adopt the husband’s proposed plan. The current arrangement stays in place until a new one is entered.