Court Must Do Best-Interest Analysis Before Changing Custody

Tennessee child custody modification case summary.

Brent H. Moore v. Karen R. Moore

Court Must Do Best-Interest Analysis Before Changing Custody

At the time of their 2018 divorce, the parents in this Lawrence County, Tennessee, case were granted equal parenting time of their daughters, who were 15 and 11 years old, with joint decision making for major decisions.

A few months later, the father petitioned to modify the parenting plan.  He alleged that the mother was not exercising her parenting time, and had moved in with another man in Indiana.

The mother agreed that the plan should be changed, but argued that the father had prevented her from exercising her parenting time, and that she should be allowed to take the children to Indiana.  Both parents also filed contempt petitions against the other.

The trial court held a hearing and found that there had, indeed, been a material change of circumstances.  The court found that it was in the children’s best interests to name the father primary residential parent, and award him 311 days per year of parenting time, with the mother receiving the remaining 54 days, which could take place in Indiana.

The trial court based the chance primarily upon its finding that the mother had failed to exercise her parenting time, in that she had simply decided to move to Indiana and never return.  The trial court also pointed to instances where the mother had shared her animosity toward the father with the children.  The competing contempt petitions were dismissed, but the mother was ordered to make some previously ordered payments.  The mother then appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals, which noted that it reviewed the lower court’s findings de novo, but with a presumption of correctness.

In this case, the lower court had not made explicit findings as to the best interests of the children.  It had made some factual findings, such as noting that the mother treated herself like a survivor, but actually played a victim.  But it had not done an analysis of the relevant factors.

The mother argued that the appeals court could do that analysis, but the court held that it would be more appropriate to remand the case and allow the trial court to do that analysis.  It noted that this is an intensely factual question, and the trial court is in the best position to do so.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals vacated the lower court’s judgment and remanded the case.  It did affirm the lower court’s ruling as to the payments the mother was required to make.

No. M2019–01065-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 24,  2022).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Modifying Custody & Parenting Plans and our video, How is child custody determined 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.