Dad Found to Be More Stable Parent in Custody Battle

Tennessee child custody case summary.

Jonathan D. Grigsby v. Alexandra Alvis-Crwaford

The mother and father in this Tennessee custody case were never married, but had a child together in 2011 and resided together until 2014.  In July 2014, while the father was at work, the mother moved out with the child, and refused to let the father see the child.  A few days later, she went into septic shock and was hospitalized until the end of September.

While the mother was in the hospital, the child stayed with the maternal grandparents, and the grandparents refused to let the father visit or speak with the child.  Instead, they told him that he would have to wait until the mother got out of the hospital.

The father filed an emergency petition, and the court found that the father was capable to care for the child and that the grandparents were unlawfully interfering with his parenting time.  Therefore, he was granted immediate temporary custody, and a hearing was scheduled to determine permanent custody.

In December, the mother also filed a petition in which she alleged that the father was unfit due to his history of drug use.  The trial court held a hearing, and in 2016 issued an order naming the father the primary residential parent, with the mother being awarded visitation.  The mother then appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

At the appeals court, the mother argued that the trial court had erred in finding that the father was the more stable parent.  She also argued that the trial court should not have separated the child from his half brother, who was residing with the mother.

The appeals court first noted that in non-jury cases such as this, the lower court’s findings have a presumption of correctness and should not be overturned unless the evidence preoponderates against them.  It also noted that trial courts have wide discretion when it comes to custody and visitation, since the trial judge is in the best position to observe the witnesses and make credibility judgments.  Finally, it noted that the needs of the children are paramount.

In this case, the key factor relied upon by the trial court was continuity.  At the time of hearing, the child had been with the father in a stable satisfactory environment for over four years.

The appeals court affirmed this finding, noting that the evidence did not preponderate against it.

The appeals court also zeroed in on this factor as being critical to the child’s best interests.  It noted that the father had provided a stable environment for the majority of the child’s life, and the child would not be well served by a change at this point.

The court discounted the mother’s evidence that the father had used drugs.  It noted that the stability of the child’s home was most important.  The “stability” of the parent himself was less important.

Finally, the appeals court agreed with the mother that a relationship with the half brother was important.  But it noted that the trial court had taken this into consideration when setting a visitation schedule, and had encouraged the parents to work out a schedule that would facilitate this relationship.

The appeals court dismissed the mother’s argument that “she has a better education and employment with the government.”  The court noted that the father also had a stable job and ability to provide for the child.

The father also asked the appeals court to award him his attorney fees, but the appeals court noted that this was also a matter for the trial court’s discretion.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s judgment.

No. W2016-00393-COA-R3-JV  (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 31, 2017).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Child Custody Laws in Tennessee.

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