The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P and D met, and they became romantically involved even though D knew that P had three children and a wife. P eventually bought a house in a Memphis suburb where the couple lived together. In early 1995, D discovered she was pregnant with P's child. Shortly after their child was born, P sold the house in Memphis, and the parties moved to Williamson County because they believed that P would have greater success as a producer in the Nashville area. P was the parties' sole source of support, and he was able to provide an exceptionally affluent lifestyle for D and their child despite his continuing obligations to his wife and children. P purchased a $420,000 home in Williamson County and horses for D. He also hired a nanny for the child. D did not work outside the home but rather spent her time raising the parties' child, training her horses, and entertaining her personal friends and P's business associates. D insisted that P buy her an engagement ring to enable her to save face with her family. D ordered the ring on her own, which P eventually paid for. D told her parents that she and P were planning to wed after he was divorced, and P did not contradict her. However, the parties themselves never discussed specific wedding plans. D levied child abuse charges against P and P was forced to move out. P was eventually cleared of charges. P divorced his wife in 1997 and saw D only once and a while but continued to pay for all her expenses. P eventually filed for a partition of the property and the return of his personal property in D’s possession. D counterclaimed for breach of a promise to marry. The court gave D $150,000 for damages for the breach and divided the proceeds from the sale of the home.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.