Mom Gets New Day In Court After 400 Day Sentence for Non-Support

Tennessee child support collection case summary in family law.

The mother and father in this Rutherford County, Tennessee, case were divorced in 2008. The father was named the primary residential parent of the three children, and the mother was granted parenting time every other weekend. The mother was also ordered to pay $525 per month in child support, as well as a portion of medical expenses.

In 2014, the father filed a motion to hold the mother in criminal contempt. He alleged that the mother failed to pay $2277 in child support, as well as $575 in medical expenses. More litigation follo0wed until, in 2015, the court held the mother in criminal contempt for 37 different counts of willful failure to pay child support and medical expenses. The court set a sentence at a total of 403 days in jail. After various post-trial motions, the mother appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

After addressing some procedural issues, the appeals court turned to the merits of her appeal. The mother first argued that there was insufficient evidence that her failure to pay was willful. In particular, she argued that there was insufficient evidence that she had a present ability to pay as the support became due. But after examining the evidence from trial, the appeals court agreed that there was enough evidence to show willfulness on her part.

The mother also argued that the trial court should have considered additional evidence she produced after trial. But the appeals court held that the trial court had acted properly.

But the mother had a more sympathetic ear when it came to the harshness of the sentence. The trial court had sentenced the mother to the maximum of 10 days for each of numerous counts. The Tennessee Supreme Court had previously approved the practice of imposing the maximum sentence consecutively for multiple counts. But other cases had suggested that the maximum sentence in such cases should be limited to six months. The appeals court did not agree that the limit was six months in all cases. But it did examine the circumstances in which consecutive sentences should be allowed, and noted that there is a presumption in favor of concurrent sentences. It also concluded that the evidence cited by the lower court in support of consecutive sentences was “surprisingly sparse.”

The appeals court concluded that the absence of specific findings of fact on the issue, and the lower court’s failure to even look at the issue of excessiveness, meant that the judgment could not stand.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals vacated the sentence and sent the case back for the trial court to make explicit findings on whether the sentence was excessive.

No. M2015-01969-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Sep. 20, 2016).

See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Child Support Collection & Enforcement 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.