Unemployment Wasn’t Voluntary So Child Support Lowered for Tenn. Dad
Tennessee child support law case law summary on child support modification from the Court of Appeals.
John Algernon Guthrie v. Karan Tracy Guthrie – Tennessee voluntary unemployment for child support change
The husband and wife were married in 1986. The husband was an occupational therapist, and the wife was a computer programmer. They had two children before their 2006 divorce. The trial court adopted a permanent parenting plan naming the wife as the primary residential parent and granting the husband 94 days of parenting time per year. It also set the child support obligation at $893 per month.
In 2010, the husband filed a petition to modify the child support. This was based in part upon the fact that the older child had reached majority. But it was also based upon the fact that he was no longer working full time, but was working only on an as-needed basis, with a gross annual income of $59,719. At the time of the hearing in 2011, he was no longer working as a therapist. Instead, he was working as the manager of one of the restaurants owned by the company of which his new wife was the CEO. He was earning a salary of approximately $2000 per month, with the possibility of a bonus. The husband cited multiple health issues for not working as an occupational therapist, and the trial court found that these health issues existed. They included a back injury, heart problems, lumbar scoliosis, hand numbness, torn miniscus in his knee. The wife contended that husband was voluntarily unemployed, but the trial court disagreed, citing the health problems. The trial court reduced the obligation to $569 per month in 2010, and $259 per month beginning in 2011. Since the husband had paid more than these amounts pending the hearing, the court awarded him a judgment for the overpaid amount of $7,840.42.
The wife appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals. She first argued that the trial court had erred in finding that the husband’s unemployment was involuntary. The Court of Appeals noted that this is a factual determination, and it was required to presume that the trial court’s findings were correct. The Court of Appeals agreed with the trial court, and concluded that the wife had not countered the husband’s evidence of health issues.
The Court of Appeals did agree with the wife that the two time periods used by the trial court to compute the child support obligation. The husband began his restaurant employment on May 16, 2011, but the trial court had based the new child support obligation as having started on January 1 of that year. Therefore, the Court of Appeals modified the judgment and included the higher obligation as lasting until May 15, rather than January 1. As a result, the Court of Appeals recomputed the overpayment and reduced the husband’s judgment from $7,840.42 to $5,445.82.
Finally, the Court of Appeals held that neither party was entitled to attorney fees, either for the proceedings in the trial court or on appeal.
No. W2012-00056-COA-R3-CV, 2012 WL 5200079 (Tenn.Ct. App. Oct 23, 2012).
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 Tennessee child support issues including setting or modifying child support. To schedule your confidential consultation about Tennessee child support, call us today at (901) 683-1850.
