Grandmother Awarded Visitation After Mom Ignores Calls and Texts

Tennessee child custody case summary on grandparent visitation rights.

Monica Chamberlain v. Myra Danielle Brown

In this Tennessee grandparent visitation case, the parents lived with the paternal grandmother when the child was born until the child was 2-1/2 years old.  In 2011, the mother, father, and child moved out of the grandmother’s house.  The next year, the parents were arrested, the child was found to be dependent and neglected, and the maternal grandparents were granted custody, with the paternal grandmother having visitation.  The next year, the mother regained custody, but the father was denied any contact with the child.

In 2014, the paternal grandmother brought a lawsuit alleging that the mother had denied her visitation, and that she was entitled to visitation under the Tennessee grandparent visitation statute.  At the time of trial, the child was six years old.

At trial, she testified that the mother had allowed her to see the child a few times, but then it stopped.  The mother had changed her phone number, and the grandmother was unable to reach her.

One issue at trial was a text sent by the grandmother in which she stated that she thought the father should be able to see the child.  She testified, however, that she never saw the father at the times she had visitation with the child.  After hearing the evidence, the trial court ruled that the grandmother was entitled to visitation.  The mother then appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

The mother raised a number of issues on appeal.  She argued that the lower court should not have used a presumption that denial of visitation would result in irreparable harm.  She also argued that there was an insufficient existing relationship between the grandmother and child, that the relationship had not, in fact, been severed, and that visitation was not in the child’s best interests.

The appeals court first noted that review was de novo, with a presumption of correctness of the trial court’s findings.

The trial court had applied a presumption in favor of visitation because the child had lived with the grandmother for over two and a half years.  The mother argued that this factor should only be applied if the grandmother had been the primary caregiver.  But the appeals court, after reading the statute, found no reason to add such a requirement.  It also found that this evidence supported the lower court’s finding of a significant relationship with the child.  Since these factors gave rise to a presumption of irreparable harm to the child, the appeals court agreed that the mother had not rebutted this presumption.

The appeals court also agreed that the mother had severed the relationship by ignoring the grandmother’s calls and texts, even if her phone number had not actually changed.

Finally, the court reviewed the factors regarding the best interest of the child and agreed with the lower court that visitation was in the child’s best interests.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s ruling, and remanded the case for the grandmother to collect her costs.

No. E2015-01658-COA-R3-CV  (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec 19, 2016).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Grandparent Visitation Rights Law 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.