Dad’s Income More Than Disability Payments in Child Support
Tennessee child support law income determination in Tennessee family law from the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
LOWERY vs. WOMBLE – Tennessee Father’s Income Determined More than Disability Payments Received
Mr. Larry G. Womble, II (the “Father”) and Ms. Venus L. Lowery (the “Mother”) were divorced in 2002, incorporating a “Marital Dissolution Agreement” and “Permanent Parenting Plan” into their “Final Decree of Divorce.” The original child support obligation of the Father to the Mother was $200/bi-weekly for the Parties’ two children.
From 2003 to 2009, the Parties filed various petitions requesting modifications of child support and parenting time. The decision on appeal was entered by the trial court in 2010 from a 2009 petition and trial court decision, which was unanimously affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
The Father lost two arguments on appeal against the upward modification of child support. First, the Father argued that his income was limited to $800 per month disability benefits. Second, the Father argued the trial court incorrectly computed the number of days he spent with his children.
First, the Father argued he was medically disabled from gainful employment, but, a “letter” by Dr. Michael J. Schlosser defeated the Father’s argument. While the doctor acknowledged it was “difficult” to explain the Father’s complaints of continuing pain, Dr. Schlosser wrote, “At this point postop, I think that he [Father] would be capable of returning to work. However, I would keep him on a 25-pound restriction until three-month postoperative period. At three months postop, I would expect him to be able to return to activity with no restrictions.” The Court of Appeals quoted this text to support the trial court’s findings that the Father was capable of gainful employment beyond his disability benefit.
It is worth noting that the Father’s medical records were obtained by the trial court upon his consent. The Father authorized a release of his medical records from Dr. Roth and Dr. White to the Assistant District Attorney for review. It is not clear whether the “letter” of Dr. Schlosser, relied upon by the Court of Appeals, was part of inter-physician communication contained within the records authorized to be released by the Father or whether the letter represented a separate communication from said physician. The Father represented himself, pro se, at the trial court and on appeal.
Second, the Father tried to reduce his child support obligation by pleading the “extraordinary circumstances” of Tennessee Comp. Rules & Regulations section 1240-02-04-.04(7)(b)(3) of caring for his children three or more days a week in the manner of a daycare provider. The Mother disputed the Father’s testimony about the dates and hours he provided care for the children and the trial court credited the Mother’s testimony, as well as the in camera (in the judge’s chambers) testimony of the children. The Court of Appeals deferred to the trial court assessment of each Party’s credibility.
No information was provided in the appellate opinion on either Parent’s age, education, income, or employer. Nor was any information provided regarding the ages of the children. There was also no indication whether any child support was agreed or ordered for such additional expenses as medical insurance, medical expenses, or third party child care services.
Venus L. Lowery vs. Larry G. Womble, II, No. M2010-01102-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. 2011).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
Memphis divorce attorney, Miles Mason, Sr., JD, CPA, practices family law exclusively with the Miles Mason Family Law Group, PLC. To learn more about Tennessee child support laws and guidelines, read and view:
