TN Mom and Dad Argue Over Equal Time Child Custody
Tennessee law case summary on child custody modification, equal parenting time, and shared or split child custody in Tennessee divorce and family law from the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
James Eldridge v Katie Hundley – Tennessee Custody Law
In the case of James Eldridge, father and Katie Hundley, mother, the father filed a petition to modify the juvenile court’s decision to name the mother as primary residential parent. The trial court modified the visitation schedule but did not establish visitation as requested by the father. As such, the father appealed the decision of the lower court.
The appeal stems from a decision in a March 2008 case to modify child custody and visitation. The parties’ child was born in August of 2006. Shortly after that, the father filed a petition in the juvenile court to establish parentage and for visitation. The father asked for liberal and frequent parenting time with the daughter. In December of 2006, the father amended the petition seeking joint decision-making and shared parenting time on an alternate week base. The lower court awarded the parties joint custody with the mother being named the primary residential parent.
The trial court provided that the father’s parenting time would include the first, third and fifth weekends of each month, from 6 pm Friday through 6 pm Sundays, two weeks in the months of June and July and part of the major holidays. In March of 2008, the father filed a motion to modify the parenting plan noting a substantial change of circumstances warranted an increase in his parenting time. The trial court granted mediation in September of 2008 and the matter continued until January of 2009. The magistrate judge heard the case in November of 2009 and a month later ordered that the mother would remain the primary residential parent with decision-making authority. It modified the visitation to first and third week each month and added Christmas visitation.
The father appealed the decision of the trial court in setting aside the December 2009 ruling of the juvenile court magistrate, which provided two alternative week parenting time. The appeals court noted the issue was whether the trial court abused its discretion in establishing the visitation schedule.
The appeals court stated that the trial court has wide discretion in establishing such arrangements so that the best interests of the child are taken into consideration and that these decisions often focused on the credibility and demeanor of the witnesses. The appeals court would not change such a ruling unless if falls outside the spectrum of rulings that might reasonably result.
The father stated that the alternate week visitation schedule was in the child’s best interests and stated that the psychologists who testified in one of the hearings in March 2010 stated that the child was thriving under this plan. The mother stated that the record supports that joint parenting of the child is not feasible in this situation and argues that expert testimony related that equal parenting time is not successful when the parents cannot cooperate.
The appeals court noted that in this case, the record contains evidence including testimony of various expert witnesses and text messages, voice mails and Internet postings that led to the trial court’s oral findings and conclusions. The appeals court found it unnecessary to vacate the findings. It ruled that, although the two parents have a contentious relationship that ended shortly after the mother became pregnant, and that both parties were dating their future husband and wife before the child was born, the transcript of the case shows that the two are not able to get along.
As such, the appeals court affirmed the lower court’s ruling that split custody would not be in best interest of the child.
No W2011-00728-COA-R3-JV, September 8, 2011.
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
Memphis divorce lawyer, Miles Mason, Sr., JD, CPA practices family law exclusively and is founder of the Miles Mason Family Law Group, PLC, which handles Tennessee family law matters including divorce, child support, alimony, prenuptial agreements, child custody, parental relocation, child support modification, alimony modification, and divorces including business valuation and forensic accounting issues.
