Court Must Clarify Reasons for Fee Award for Attorney & Guardian Ad Litem

Tennessee child custody modification and attorney’s fees case summary.

Katherine Marie Lugo v. Hector Santiago Lugo

The mother and father in this Shelby County, Tennessee (Judge James R. Russell) case were the parents of two children when they divorced in 2017.  They agreed to a permanent parenting plan, but five months later, the father filed a petition for contempt and to modify the parenting plan.

The children both expressed a desire to be represented in the case, and it was likely that they would be called as witnesses.  Therefore, the trial court appointed a guardian ad litem.  The order appointing the guardian stated that the parties would be required to pay the fees equally unless the court made an order to the contrary.  A hearing was held, and the contempt allegations by both parties were dismissed.  The father was ordered to pay the mother almost $700 in expenses.

The mother’s motion to modify the parenting plan was granted, which resulted in the father’s parenting time being reduced.  The mother sought attorney fees of over $55,000, and the guardian ad litem’s fees were almost $10,000.

The trial court ordered the father to pay half of the mother’s attorney’s fees.  It based this ruling on the grounds that the mother had prevailed on at least half of the issues.  The trial court also ordered each party to pay half of the guardian ad litem fees.  After a number of post-trial motions, the mother appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals, and the father also raised a number of issues on appeal.

The appeals court first turned to the attorney fee award.  Unfortunately, the appeals court concluded that it could not discern the trial court’s reasons for ruling as it had.  The marital termination agreement specified that the prevailing party would be entitled to fees for certain issues, but the trial court had not made a detailed explanation for how this provision had been applied.  The record suggested that the trial court based its ruling on “a feeling,” and the appeals court held that it was unable to meaningfully review the decision.

For these reasons, the appeals court vacated this portion of the ruling and remanded the case for more detailed findings.

The appeals court came to the same result with respect to the guardian ad litem fees.  The trial court had at one point referred to the wrong exhibit, and this error was never satisfactorily rectified.

For this reason, the lower court’s decision was vacated and the case remanded.

No. M2020-00312-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 10,  2021).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Modifying Custody & Parenting Plans.

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.