TN Mom’s Child Support Computed Based on Actual Tax Deductions

Tennessee child support case summary on income determination.

Kyle Kernan v. Beverly J. Kernan Nabors, et al.

The mother and father in this Tennessee case were divorced in 1998, and the mother was awarded custody.  The father was ordered to pay child support, but he rarely met the obligation.

In 2008, the mother was hospitalized and admitted to a rehabilitation clinic because of alcoholism and addiction to pain medication.  She gradually resumed visitation and regained full custody in 2012.  During the intervening time, her adult son was granted guardianship over the two minor children.

In 2012, while still serving as guardian, the son intervened in the divorce action to seek child support from both parents.  The trial court established that the father owed an arrearage of over $29,000.  He was ordered to begin payment of $498 per month, plus $40 to cover the arrearage.  The mother was ordered to pay support of $914 per month.

After the mother resumed custody, her obligation was ended, but the court heard testimony to determine the amount of arrearage.  During the relevant years, her income was $34,000, $56,000, and $83,000.

In determining the mother’s income, the magistrate had ruled that the mother was not entitled to deductions for medical and dental expenses, California income tax, and business travel deductions.  This increased the amount of income that was used to compute her child support.  She appealed to the trial court, which held that she was entitled to these deductions.  On remand, the magistrate also held that the mother should be given credit for certain voluntary payments she made.

After a final ruling, the son appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.  He argued that the mother miscalculated the mother’s income, and should not have given credit for all of the deductions.  He also argued that the mother was not entitled to adjustments for the time that she spent with the children when the son had legal custody.

The appeals court first looked at the computation of income.  It held that the trial court had acted properly in allowing various deductions from income for travel expenses.  It noted that this was within the lower court’s discretion, and the lower court had not abused its discretion.

The appeals court also held that it was proper to credit the mother for expenses she had paid.  It noted that in many cases, the son had sent e-mails requesting that she pay these expenses directly, and that the result was the same as if she had sent these amounts to the son who would pay them directly.

Finally, the appeals court held that the lower court had properly computed parenting time, and that its ruling on attorney fees was correct.  For these reasons, it affirmed the lower court’s ruling.

No. E2014-01679-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 1, 2016).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Child Support Laws in Tennessee.

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.