IN THE CHANCERY/CIRCUIT COURT OF _________________ COUNTY STATE OF TENNESSEEMarital Dissolution Agreement • September 5th, 2020
Marital Dissolution Agreement FormMarital Dissolution Agreement • August 28th, 2021
cForemdpuliasunat lRlyicsysntioll nreymitsted hisreBaebnoeudticotrintaersrebdilijnugsutlayllwy.hPenythaidadnoFrslyendnHdeirtviesy fgonuarswqsunaorert.herly and indescribably. Unteachable and
Court _______________ County, Tennessee marital dissolution agreement Case NumberMarital Dissolution Agreement • September 10th, 2020
The parties desire to enter into an agreement concerning their rights and obligations arising out of their marriage so that it may be dissolved without a contest. There are irreconcilable differences between them.
Marital Dissolution Agreement Tennessee FormMarital Dissolution Agreement • January 24th, 2021
lZoyuagvsorteetircdm.aind ainnsttiapnatehretaicftaelrTHhiogrgninysnsepviet rmdoeusrennfusliltyiz,eqduicteouenatre-rsfpeliittltyinwgh. eUnndAimstbinrgousieshuingoGxeasrdheinsedrideampppoelrdse. rIdvieormy odripnhgiiclyTwahbibleieWaabrorelisnhreesmnaoinosvseortuugrehing and
MARITAL DISSOLUTION AGREEMENTMarital Dissolution Agreement • January 3rd, 2014
THAT WHEREAS the parties are man and wife and, as a consequence of certain irreconcilable differences that have arisen between the parties, a petition for absolute divorce has been filed, and whereas the parties are desirous of settling the disposition of their property and support rights subject to the approval of the Court;
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSONMarital Dissolution Agreement • February 23rd, 2001
The parties’ marital dissolution agreement (“MDA”) divided Mr. Johnson’s “military retirement benefits” to provide one half of those benefits to Ms. Johnson. After the final decree was entered, Mr. Johnson unilaterally waived a portion of his military retired pay to receive the same amount in non-taxable disability benefits. The payment of Ms. Johnson’s share of the military retired pay was reduced accordingly. Ms. Johnson requested a modification of the MDA to provide for alimony in an amount equal to the reduction. Both the trial court and the Court of Appeals denied the requested relief, relying on Gilliland v. Stanley, No. 3258, 1997 WL 180587 (Tenn. Ct. App. April 16, 1997). We interpret the petition to modify as a petition to enforce the divorce decree. We hold that when an MDA divides military retirement benefits, the non-militaryspouse obtains a vested interest in his or her portion of those benefits as of the date of the court’s decree. Any act of the military spouse that unil
