TN Dad Doesn’t Get Judgment Against Mother For Voluntary Overpayments of Child Support

Tennessee child support case summary.

In re Andrea R.

This was the second appeal of this child support case to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.  In a 2012 decision, the appeals court sent the case back to the trial court in order to make findings of fact as to whether private schooling was appropriate under the facts of the case.

On remand, the mother sought to introduce evidence regarding the appropriateness of private school.  But the trial court declined to hear additional testimony, instead relying on the evidence introduced at the first trial.  Based upon that evidence, the trial court held that private school was not appropriate because the parties could not afford it.

The trial court went on to calculate the father’s child support obligation over the retroactive period.  During that time, the father had made voluntary payments in excess of that obligation.  Therefore, the trial court held that no arrearage was owed.

The mother then brought a second appeal and made a number of arguments.  The appeals court first addressed the issue of private school tuition, and affirmed the lower court’s order.  It then turned to the question of retroactive child support.

The mother argued that the trial court had miscalculated the father’s income during that period.  The father, on the other hand, argued that he was entitled to a judgment against the mother for the amount of over-payment.

The mother argued that many of the over-payments should not have been credited, because they were for her benefit, and not for the child’s.  For example, the father had purchased for the mother a car.

The appeals court held that the majority of the father’s payments fell under the “equitable considerations rule,” a rule applied when one parent makes payments for necessary items that are not being paid by the other parent.  The court noted that the money was used for the benefit of the child, even though the father never exercised any control over the money.  According to the court, those payments achieved the purpose of a child support award and should be credited.

However, the court did not believe that the father was entitled to a judgment for the over-payments.  It noted that the father had freely and voluntarily made the payments.  Even though they turned out to be more than required, under these circumstances, he was not entitled to a judgment for over-payment.

After addressing a number of other issues, the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s order and remanded the case.

No. M2014-01895-COA-R3-JV (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 30, 2015).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Child Support Laws in Tennessee.

See also Tennessee Parenting Plans and Child Support Worksheets: Building a Constructive Future for Your Family featuring actual examples of parenting plans and child support worksheets from real cases available on Amazon.com.