TN Dad Wants Lower Child Support, Mom Wants Increase, Neither Wins
Tennessee child support law case law summary on changing child support amount due from the Court of Appeals.
MARILYN S. BOYD v. THOMAS H. BATES, JR. – TN Child Support Modification Law
The parties in this case are Marilyn S. Boyd (“Mother”) and Thomas H. Bates (“Father”). Mother and Father were divorced in March 1991 and during the marriage the parties had two children. The occupation and education of Mother and Father are not addressed in the case. The child support agreement was entered into in March 1991 and Father was deemed responsible for $677 per month in child support and any all medical and dental care not paid for by insurance, including orthodontic work. The amount of child support was increased to $1,000 per month after Mother received a judgment against Father for unpaid child support.
Father sought to reduce his share of uninsured medical expenses for the two children from 100% responsibility to only 50%. Father argued that an increase in child support to $1,000 per month was a “significant change in circumstances” and thus would allow a change to the divorce agreement. Mother sought to (1) uphold the upward deviation in child support to $1,000 per month, (2) collect unpaid child support and medical expenses, and (3) hold Father responsible for 100% of uninsured medical expenses. The trial court awarded Mother unpaid child support and medical expenses, but Mother was only entitled to the original $677 per month child support payment and only 2/3 of uninsured medical costs.
In determining that Mother’s upward modification of child support was unsupported, the trial court used the Income Shares child support model. According to the Income Shares model there must be a “significant variance” in Father’s adjusted gross income to modify the child support order. The trial court did not find a variance as Father’s tax returns showed an income of approximately $50,000 for the past three years.
Mother appealed the trial court ruling arguing that the trial court erred in refusing to increase Father’s child support to comply with applicable Tennessee Child Support laws and guidelines and that the trial court erred in applying the income shared model in determining child support. The appellate court denied both claims. The appellate court agreed with the trial court, in that the Husband did not have a significant variance in income to satisfy the requirements under the law. In addition, the appellate court failed to find any evidence to support Mother’s claims that Father’s tax returns did not include capital gains and dividends. Mother argued that Father failed to report this additional income, which would increase his salary by approximately $30,000.
The appellate court further agreed with the trial court in that the income shared child support model was correctly used, even when Husband petition was in 2003 and the income shared model became effective in 2005. The statute specifically states that the Income shares guidelines effectiveness date depends on the date of the hearing, not on the date the petition was filed. The trial court had the hearing on the child support modification on February 10, 2005. Thus, it was after the January 18, 2005 effectiveness date.
Appellate court affirmed the trial court’s decision and Father was only responsible for the original amount of $677 per month and 2/3rds of the uninsured medical expenses of the two children.
No. M2007-02345-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 11, 2008).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
For more information, see Tennessee Child Support Answers to FAQ’s. For legal updates, news, analysis, and commentary, visit our Tennessee Family Law Blog and its Child Support category. A Memphis child support attorney from the Miles Mason Family Law Group can help you with setting or modifying child support. To schedule your confidential consultation about Tennessee child support, call us today at (901) 683-1850.
