By Peter The Great

In a case that is sure to be a precedent setter, the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled Friday that a man does not have to pay lifetime alimony to his ex-wife.

In 2009 the Tennessee Appeals Court had ruled that Craig Gonsewski had to pay his ex $1250 a month in alimony for life or until she remarried.

The news is saying that this is different from most cases because the ex-wife was employed, worked the whole time of the marriage, and was in her 40’s at the time of the divorce.

Mr. Gonsewski appealed the Appeals Court ruling claiming that the decision went too far in giving her alimony for life.

At the time of the divorce Craig Gonsewski made $137,000 as a controller for a corporation, while Johanna Gonsewski, who worked for the state as an information manager, made $72,000.

Johanna’s attorney had argued that Craig had “struck gold” with his job, while Johanna had topped out; and also claimed that she had helped put him through college.

The Tennessee Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the lifetime alimony was inappropriate because Johanna Gonsewski held a stable job, earned considerable income and was awarded a significant amount of assets in the property settlement.

The Court of Appeals found that Johanna was unlikely to earn any more as a state employee, that she needed more money, and he had the ability to pay.

The Supreme Court stated, “In many instances, the parties’ assets and incomes simply will not permit them to achieve the same standard of living after the divorce as they enjoyed during the marriage” – Chief Justice Cornelia A. Clark wrote.

The Court also found that the ex-wife was not entitled to the lump-sum alimony award of her attorney fees because she was partially responsible for generating them and had the financial resources to pay them.

Taking on the Appeals Court, the Supreme Court also ruled that trial courts have broad discretion in awarding alimony, and that “an appellate court should not reverse a trial court’s alimony decision unless the trial court has abused its discretion.”

It noted that the lower court did not abuse its discretion when it decided to award no alimony to either party, and reinstated the judgment of the trial court.

Johanna Gonsewski’s attorney said that his client “will be extremely disappointed.”

This case can well be a real precedent in overturning automatic alimony and lifetime support everywhere due to the status of the Court. It was a good day for men!