Lawyer Needn’t Pay More than Child Support Guideline Amount

Tennessee child support case summary in divorce.

Julie C. W. v. Frank Mitchell W., Jr.

The husband and wife in this Davidson County, Tennessee, case were married in 2003.  Both parties were attorneys for the same firm.  The husband was a partner and the wife was a part-time staff attorney.  The husband’s income was considerably greater than the wife’s.  The husband was 16 years older than the wife.  The husband had two children from a prior marriage, and the parties had two children together, aged 10 and 14.  The parties separated in 2012, and the wife filed for divorce.

Under the child support guidelines, the husband’s child support obligation was $3,200 per month, and the husband agreed to pay private school tuition.  The wife asked for an amount in addition to this amount.  The trial court, however, looked at her proposed expenses, and held that they were not reasonable amounts.  Instead, the trial court found that “this court does not believe” the wife on those expenses.  Therefore, it denied the mother’s request.  After deciding the other issues in the case, it issued its final judgment, and the wife appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.  Her appeal was successful as to the property division.  She argued that the trial court had placed too much emphasis on the husband’s age.  Therefore, it remanded on this issue.

The wife was less successful on the issue of child support.  The wife conceded that the amount awarded was consistent with the guidelines.  But she argued that a strict application of the guidelines was not in the children’s best interest.

The trial court agreed with the wife that the children had enjoyed a well-off lifestyle during the marriage.  But it also noted that decisions to depart from the guidelines were within the trial court’s discretion, and the trial court had specifically made a credibility determination against the wife.  After reviewing the evidence, the appeals court affirmed the child support award.

After affirming a number of other issues, the Court of Appeals, in a decision authored by Chief Judge D. Michael Swiney, remanded the case to the lower court.

Appellate Judge Kristi M. Davis penned a concurring opinion.  While she agreed with the majority’s reasoning, she pointed out what she described as a “troubling issue” in the case:  The wife had testified that food expenses for herself and the children were $2000 per month, and the trial court had found that this figure was not credible.  But Judge Davis pointed out that the husband’s budget for food was $2,600 per month, and the trial court “had no issue” with this number.  She stated that she was perplexed by the discrepancy, and opined that $2,000 for three people (including two teenagers) was a reasonable figure, given the parties’ incomes.

No. M2019-01243-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 26,  2021).

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.