Mom Admitted to Sex After Separation But Still Adultery in Tennessee

Tennessee case summary on grounds of adultery and vaccination over objection of mother in divorce.

Brianna Danielle King v. Aaron Jefferson Daily

The husband and wife in this Rutherford County, Tennessee, case were married in 2011 and had two children, a son born in 2011 and a daughter born in 2013.  The husband worked for Nissan, and the wife stayed at home to care for the children.  In 2016, police responded to a domestic disturbance and arrested the wife for domestic assault.

Shortly thereafter, the wife filed for divorce on the grounds of irreconcilable differences and inappropriate marital conduct.  The husband filed a counter complaint on the grounds of inappropriate marital conduct and adultery.

One issue of contention was vaccination of the minor children.  While the divorce was pending, the parties entered into an agreed order naming the child’s pediatrician and stating that the children would be vaccinated before the start of the school year.  But the wife changed her mind and filed a religious exemption with the school.  The husband filed a motion for contempt, and a special master agreed.

Trial was held before Judge William Acree, who awarded the divorce to the husband on the grounds of inappropriate marital conduct and adultery.  The finding of adultery was based on the wife’s testimony that she had sexual relationships with other men during the marriage, even though these were after the couple had split up.  The husband was named the primary residential parent, with sole decision-making authority as to medical issues.  The wife appealed, pro se, to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

The wife first argued that she was not guilty of adultery, since the sexual encounters took place after she and the husband were separated, albeit not legally separated.

Citing earlier cases, the appeals court made clear that the legal obligations of marriage are not terminated by mere separation.  Indeed, it pointed out that such adultery makes the possibility of future reconciliation much less likely.  For this reason, the Court of Appeals affirmed the finding of adultery as grounds for the divorce.

The wife next argued that giving the husband sole decision-making authority with respect to medical decisions violated her fundamental right to make decisions regarding her children.  In particular, she argued that she was opposed to vaccinations on religious grounds.

The appeals court noted that parenting issues should be left to parents, but by necessity, in divorce cases, courts must intervene.  The court examined the facts of the case and agreed with the lower court that the decision was in the children’s best interest.

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

No. M2017-01743-COA-R3-CV  (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 30, 2018).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see The Tennessee Divorce Process: How Divorces Work Start to Finish.