Property Deeded Before Marriage Transmuted to Marital Property | Estate Planning Newsletter

In the case of Pickett vs. Pickett, the Court dealt with the facts of a husband using his own funds acquired prior to marriage and purchasing a home (the “Shady Grove Home”) prior to marriage. Also, prior to marriage the  husband executed a quitclaim deed conveying a one-half undivided interest in the Shady Grove Home to his future wife with right of survivorship. The couple were later married, and a divorce ultimately ensued. The wife claimed that the Shady Grove Home was marital property subject to division in the marriage.  

The husband claimed that the Shady Grove Home should remain separate property because he used money from a family inheritance to purchase the Shady Grove Home prior to marriage. The proof also showed that the wife made no contribution for the purchase of the Shady Grove Home, nor did she contribute to the cost of certain improvements. The husband asserted that the $150,000 purchase price he paid for the Shady Grove Home that was acquired prior to the marriage should be awarded to him before the proceeds from the sale of the Shady Grove Home were divided between husband and wife.

The Trial Court ruled in favor of the wife and held that the property owned as joint tenants with right of survivorship transmuted the Shady Grove Home into marital property when the deed was signed and recorded.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court and wrote that the classification of property as “separate” or “marital” property is a question of fact to be determined in light of all circumstances. The Court explained that separate property can become marital property through transmutation or comingling. The Court sited a prior Tennessee Supreme Court case that explained “transmutation occurs when separate property is treated in such a way as to give evidence of an intention that it become marital property.”

MY RECOMMENDATION: If property acquired prior to marriage is intended to remain separate property in the event of a divorce, the party acquiring the property should never put it in joint names, but instead keep as separate property and operate as separate property.  

Yours very truly,

RAINEY, KIZER, REVIERE & BELL, P.L.C.

William C. Bell, Jr., Attorney at Law

This letter is intended to provide you with ideas for consideration in commercial transactions.  It is not intended to give a general solution applicable to all apparently similar individual problems, since slight changes in facts may require variance in legal advice.  Please contact legal counsel with specific questions.