Positive Drug Test For Marijuanna Not Enough to Warrant Change of Custody
Tennessee child custody modification case summary.
Larry Todd Hoover v. Morgan Siera Hoover – Tennessee divorce post-divorce custody modification
The mother and father in this Tennessee divorce case were married in 2009 and had one son. They were divorced in 2011, and at the time of trial, the father had moved to North Carolina. The court named the mother the primary residential parent, with the father having co-parenting time of 105 days per year. The parties agreed to meet in Asheville, North Carolina, to exchange the child.
Eight months later, the father was back in court, requesting a modification of the parenting plan. He stated that he was actually exercising more than half the parenting time. The mother had given birth to another child, and the living situation was stressful and unstable, according to the father. He thought the mother was abusing drugs or alcohol. He asked to be named primary residential parent, with the son spending two weeks with each parent alternating.
The trial court ordered drug tests for both parents, and the mother tested positive for marijuana. The father was “unable to produce a urine specimen,” which the trial court took to be the same a positive result. At the time of trial, the court ordered another drug screen for both parents, which they both passed.
The parties stipulated that there had been a material change of circumstances, based upon the fact that the son was ready to enter kindergarten. A trial was held on the best interest of the child.
The father testified that they had already been doing the alternating two weeks, and it was working well. The father was remarried, and he and his new wife took turns providing child care. The father’s parents also assisted.
The mother testified that the failed drug test was a “one time thing,” and that her living situation was stable. She was engaged to her live-in boyfriend, and she was gainfully employed.
After hearing all of the evidence, the trial court once again named the mother as the primary residential parent. The father received co-parenting time of 105 days per year, consisting of alternate weekends, fall and spring vacation and part of winter vacation, and four weeks during the summer. The father then appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
The appeals court first reiterated that the controlling issue was the best interests of the child. Because that determination is factually driven, the trial judge is in a better position to make the evaluation, the appeals court noted. Therefore, the court stated that it would not reverse unless there was an abuse of discretion. In that light, it reviewed the evidence.
Even though the lower court had accepted the stipulation that there had been a material change of circumstances, it went on to find that the change in circumstances wasn’t sufficient to change the designation of residential parent. The appeals court reviewed the evidence and agreed with the trial court on this point.
But since the trial court had gone on to look at the best interest of the child, the appeals court reviewed this evidence as well. After a careful review, the appeals court agreed with the lower court that both parents had a strong bond with the child. However, it also agreed with the lower court that the factors concerning future performance as a parent slightly favored the mother. Since the trial court had been able to hear the witnesses testify, the appeals court believed that the lower court’s ruling should be affirmed.
For these reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s ruling, and assessed the costs of the appeal on the father.
No. E2014-01629-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. July 16, 2015).
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 actual examples of parenting plans and child support worksheets from real cases available on Amazon.com.
