Pyles v. Pyles
| Docket Number | 1773-2022 |
| Decision Date | 16 January 2024 |
| Parties | TERRANCE L. PYLES v. RHOSHANDA M. PYLES |
| Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
Nazarian, Ripken, Kenney, James A. III (Senior Judge Specially Assigned), JJ.
This case arises from the entry of a divorce judgment by the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, which ended the marriage of Terrance L. Pyles ("Husband") and Rhoshanda M. Pyles ("Wife"). Husband presents four questions on appeal, which we have reordered:
Answering the first two questions, we conclude that the trial court did not make sufficient findings of fact with respect to the survivor's annuity and the home improvement loan. We shall therefore vacate the monetary award and remand for further findings in accordance with this opinion. Because the monetary award must be vacated, we must also vacate the alimony award and the award of attorney's fees. See Turner v. Turner, 147 Md.App. 350, 400-01 (2002) (footnote omitted) (). We shall address the remaining issues to the extent necessary to provide guidance on remand.
The parties met when Wife was pursuing an undergraduate degree in business management and Husband was in medical school. They graduated from their respective programs in 1998 and married the same year. The parties are the parents of three adult children, all of whom graduated from college.
They began their married life in Maryland, where Husband completed his residency in emergency medicine at area hospitals. Wife worked for a bank and assumed primary responsibility for the care and supervision of the children and day-to-day maintenance of the family home.
In January 2000, Husband began active duty service in the United States Navy as a physician, a position which he continued to hold throughout the marriage. His first duty station was Jacksonville, Florida. The parties moved to Jacksonville and built a home there.[1] Husband traveled back and forth from Jacksonville to Pensacola to attend a sixmonth training program. He was then sent to California for a year and a half. They agreed that Wife would remain in Jacksonville with the children, so as not to "uproot" the family. While there, Wife began working as a teacher and athletics coach at a middle school.
The parties moved back to Maryland when Husband was stationed at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center ("Walter Reed") from 2004 to 2009. Wife obtained a teaching certificate and began working as a teacher in the Montgomery County Public School system. She earned a master's degree in educational leadership in 2007 and pursued a career in school administration.
From 2009 to 2011, Husband was stationed in Norfolk, Virginia. At trial, Husband explained that Wife did not relocate to Norfolk with him because it was an "operational assignment" and he would be deployed on a ship for almost a year.
When Husband returned home from Norfolk in 2011, he told Wife that he was no longer in love with her, and that they needed to get divorced. Wife persuaded Husband to stay in the marriage for the sake of their children.
From 2011 to 2013 Husband was again stationed in Florida and Wife and the children remained in Maryland. It was then that Husband began "moonlighting" for a privately-owned health care company to help pay for the children's private school tuition and maintain the family home in Maryland. He continued to work as a contract physician, in addition to his position with the Navy, up to and including the time of trial.
From 2013 to 2016, Husband was stationed in Indian Head, Maryland. During that time, Husband spent every fourth to sixth weekend at the family home. Wife and the children also visited him in Indian Head. In January 2016, he disclosed to Wife that he had fathered a son with another woman.
That same year, Husband was transferred from Indian Head to Groton, Connecticut. He asked Wife to relocate to Connecticut, but she chose to remain in Maryland with the children. Husband was stationed in Connecticut from 2016 to July 2019.
From August 2019 to the date of trial, Husband was again stationed at Walter Reed. Returning to Maryland in 2019, he again told Wife he wanted a divorce and moved into the basement of the family home. He moved out of the marital home in June 2021.
In February 2021, while living in the basement of the family home, Husband filed for a limited divorce. Wife filed a counterclaim for divorce based on adultery and constructive desertion. Her requested relief included a monetary award, pension and survivor benefits, alimony, and attorney's fees.
On October 7, 2021, the parties consented to the entry of a pendente lite order. Under the terms of that order, Wife was granted temporary possession of the marital home. In lieu of direct alimony payments to Wife, Husband was to pay the mortgage and insurance for the marital home, as well as installments of a home equity loan secured by the marital home.
Husband amended his complaint in June 2022 to request an absolute divorce based on a one-year separation. Wife filed an amended counterclaim, alleging that Husband had dissipated marital funds.
A two-day merits hearing was held in August 2022 on issues of marital property, alimony, and attorney's fees. At the time of trial, Husband was 49 years old and Wife was 47 years old.
Husband testified to "growing pains" in the beginning of the marriage. He said that he did not think he was ready for marriage at that time, but that he had "tried to make the best of it[.]"
He admitted to extramarital relationships. The first was in 2000, while on a "boys trip" to Las Vegas. In 2010 he reconnected with the same woman, and a child was conceived at that time. Husband learned of the child in 2011 but he did not tell Wife until 2016. He began paying child support in 2016, after a paternity test confirmed that he was the father.
Husband had another extramarital affair when he was stationed in Norfolk, from 2009 to 2011. When he returned from that deployment, Wife discovered photographs of his paramour on his phone. Husband stated, "[t]hat's when it led to, you know, this isn't going anywhere[.]" He told Wife that he was not in love with her and that they needed to get divorced. Although he agreed to stay in the marriage, for the sake of the children, he "didn't see the point." In his opinion, "[t]here was clearly no trust and there was nothing that was going to be salvaged[.]" He said that continuing to work on the marriage was "okay for a while, but fundamentally what was driving [him and Wife] apart never got better." When Husband was asked what he thought had driven them apart, he responded,
When Husband returned to Maryland from Connecticut in August 2019, he decided that staying in the marriage was "pointless." He moved into the basement of the marital home and "laid . . . out" a plan for the parties to "coexist" and "get [their] affairs together . . . so that everyone [would be] okay" when they divorced.
In June of 2021, Husband moved out of the marital home and into a one-bedroom apartment. That same month, he withdrew approximately $24,000 from an Ameritrade investment account in his name, leaving a balance of $2,085.67. He also withdrew approximately $19,000 from a Charles Schwab investment account in his name, leaving a balance of $25. Husband testified that he used those funds to pay off his credit cards and other "significant bills." Except for a loan in her name that was used to purchase a car for their eldest daughter, he did not pay off Wife's debts.
In the first seven months of 2022, Husband withdrew approximately $14,000 from his Ameritrade account, leaving it with a balance of $212.60. There was no evidence as to how those funds were used.
In May of 2022, Husband withdrew the balance of his Thrift Savings Plan retirement account. He split the proceeds with Wife, after deducting early withdrawal penalties from her share. She received approximately $12,000. Husband used half of his share to repair a daughter's car.
When Husband's lease expired, in June 2022, he moved in with his parents. He testified that he planned to move in with his girlfriend, whom we shall refer to as "N.", who owned a house in Fredericksburg, Virginia. He would probably move in with N. in January 2023, when his posting at Walter Reed ended. Husband had started using N.'s address as his own on certain documents, including his Ameritrade account.
N., who Husband said was "very self-sufficient[,]" had purchased the home in Fredericksburg in October 2021. Husband denied contributing funds toward the purchase of the Fredericksburg home and, as of the time of trial, he had no agreement to pay N. rent.
Husband gave conflicting testimony regarding his future living arrangements on redirect examination, when his attorney asked him to update the expenses he had listed on the financial...
To continue reading
Request your trial