Tennessee baby custody and parenting relocation case abstract.
The kid on this Putnam County, Tennessee, case was born in 2016 to unwed mother and father. The daddy was current on the delivery and even lower the wire. He voluntarily acknowledged paternity.
The mom, father, and baby lived along with the mom’s mother and father for the primary month of the kid’s life, after which they moved to Cookeville, Tennessee, the place they resided for 2 years with the daddy’s mother and father. In 2019, they purchased a house in Gallatin, Tennessee, however in late 2019, the mom ended the connection and moved again along with her mother and father. After the breakup, they continued to share equal parenting time.
After turning into concerned in a relationship with the administrator of the nursing residence the place she labored, there was an investigation, and in the end, each resigned from their jobs. The 2 have been engaged, and shortly thereafter, the brand new fiancé acquired a six-figure job supply in Texas. The mom then knowledgeable the daddy that she was altering the custody schedule, and the daddy would have solely seven days per thirty days.
The mom moved with the kid to Texas in 2020, and the daddy was unaware till he acquired a letter the subsequent month. She didn’t present her new deal with or telephone quantity, and the daddy was unable to contact the kid for 9 days. The next month, the daddy filed a petition to determine paternity within the juvenile courtroom. Pending trial, every mum or dad was to have the kid for 42 day intervals.
The ultimate listening to was held in 2022 earlier than Choose Steven D. Qualls. The trial courtroom named the daddy as main residential mum or dad, with the daddy having custody in Tennessee through the faculty 12 months. The mom was granted visitation in Texas throughout faculty breaks. The daddy was granted resolution making authority.
The courtroom discovered that each mother and father have been succesful and had been equal caregivers.
The mom then appealed to the Tennessee Courtroom of Appeals, which first summarized the usual of assessment earlier than turning to the statutory elements utilized in custody instances.
The mom centered on the kid’s relationship with different members of the family in Texas. She claimed that there was a choice for putting youngsters along with their half-siblings, however the appeals courtroom famous that there was no authority for this proposition. Right here, the decrease courtroom had pointed to the kid’s household relationships in Tennessee, and the appeals courtroom discovered no error.
The appeals courtroom subsequent analyzed the extent of every mum or dad’s parenting involvement. As soon as once more, the appeals courtroom agreed with the decrease courtroom’s evaluation of the events’ primarily equal involvement.
The mom had claimed that the kid was “regressing” beneath the 50/50 parenting plan, however the decrease courtroom referred to as this declare “unfounded.” The appeals courtroom agreed, and held that such determinations of a celebration’s credibility have been finest left to trial courts.
It additionally affirmed the decrease courtroom’s discovering that the kid’s remaining in Tennessee was in his finest curiosity.
After its assessment of the entire statutory elements, the Courtroom of Appeals affirmed the decrease courtroom’s ruling in all respects.
No. M2022-01003-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. July 7, 2023).
See authentic opinion for actual language. Authorized citations omitted.
To be taught extra, see Tennessee Guardian Relocation Statute Legislation.
See additionally Tennessee Parenting Plans and Child Support Worksheets: Building a Constructive Future for Your Family that includes examples of parenting plans and baby assist worksheets from actual instances accessible on Amazon.com.