In a legal battle over alimony payments that has stretched over the better part of a decade, the Tennessee Supreme Court has rendered a verdict that may resonate for years to come. As the contentious dispute between Middle Tennessee attorney John Colley and his ex-wife, Vanessa Turner, reached its crescendo, the state's highest court upheld a ruling that Mr. Colley must pay the attorney fees incurred by Ms. Turner during their protracted litigation, despite his efforts to terminate his alimony obligations ahead of schedule.
Following their 2012 divorce, and as outlined in their marital dissolution agreement (MDA), Ms. Turner was set to receive alimony until such time as she remarried, which occurred in March 2019. Mr. Colley, prior to her remarriage, filed a petition in January 2019 seeking to cease alimony payments two months beforehand, initiating what would become almost two years of heated litigation. His discovery requests, which included demands for Ms. Turner’s cell phone, media from her fiancé's residence, and the contact details of her fiancé’s family, were characterized by the trial court to be the actions of a "bully."
Days before their scheduled hearing, Mr. Colley chose to voluntarily dismiss his petition, a move that did not deter Ms. Turner from seeking reimbursement for her legal defenses. She asked the trial court to compel Mr. Colley to cover her attorney fees, a request Mr. Colley contested on the basis that Tennessee law only allowed for awards to "prevailing parties"—a status he claimed Ms. Turner did not possess due to his voluntary dismissal. Despite his argument, the trial court labeled Mr. Colley's actions as bullying and granted Ms. Turner $16,500 in attorney fees.
The Court of Appeals initially reversed this order, but the Tennessee Supreme Court ultimately disagreed. In their decision, detailed on the state court's website, the justices affirmed that even with a voluntary dismissal, Turner had indeed "prevailed" in preserving her alimony. The majority opinion, penned by Chief Justice Holly Kirby, clarified that "the challenger who forfeits, loses, and his opponent wins." Justice Sarah K. Campbell, writing a concurring opinion, emphasized that while Mr. Colley's dismissal did not automatically render Ms. Turner the prevailing party, her status was justified as she was defending an already granted alimony award. Nevertheless, Justice Campbell expressed caution that the majority's rationale should be narrowly applied to the family-law context.
Those interested in the finer details of this Supreme Court ruling can delve into the majority opinion authored by Chief Justice Kirby and the concurrence by Justice Campbell through the opinions section of TNCourts.gov.
