Bobby Joe Pack v. Rebecca Suzanna Rothchild
E2016-00873-COA-R3-CV
| Tenn. Ct. App. | Jul 21, 2017Background
- Parties married in January 2006; two sons born in 2006 and 2008. They separated in February 2012 and Father filed for divorce in June 2012. Multiple hearings and a multi-day trial occurred; final divorce order entered March 31, 2016.
- Trial court named Father primary residential parent, divided marital assets/debts, and denied Mother alimony. Mother appealed. The record on appeal was incomplete (only two trial dates transcribed).
- Trial court found Mother previously was primary caregiver but had unilaterally denied Father parenting time, was emotionally volatile, and would not facilitate Father’s relationship with the children. Father was found calm and capable and had assumed primary care since September 2015.
- Trial court rejected Mother’s allegations that Father’s parenting amounted to abuse, though found Mother’s interference and emotional behavior to constitute emotional abuse. Court adopted Father’s proposed parenting plan.
- Mother failed to comply with Court of Appeals Rule 7 for property-division briefing (no Rule 7 table or record citations), resulting in waiver of her attack on the property division.
- Trial court denied alimony because Mother did not present proof at trial; appellate court could not overturn that factual finding given the incomplete record and affirmed the denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Rothchild) | Defendant's Argument (Pack) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Custody — primary residential parent | Mother argued she should be primary custodial parent | Father argued he was proper primary parent due to having been primary caretaker since separation and Mother’s interference | Court affirmed appointment of Father as primary residential parent; decision within trial court’s discretion given findings about Mother’s interference and emotional volatility |
| Property division — classification and valuation | Mother challenged trial court’s property/debt division | Father argued Mother failed Rule 7 and mischaracterized assets (some property belonged to Father’s mother) | Court found Mother waived property-division issues for failure to comply with Rule 7 and affirmed division |
| Alimony — award of spousal support | Mother sought alimony; contended she preserved claim in pleadings and arguments | Father argued Mother failed to present proof at trial | Court affirmed denial of alimony because trial court found Mother failed to pursue claim through testimony or cross-examination; appellate review limited by incomplete record |
| Attorney’s fees on appeal (Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-1-122) | N/A (Mother appealed) | Father sought fees for frivolous appeal | Issue waived on appeal for failure to properly present as an assigned issue; court declined to award fees sua sponte |
Key Cases Cited
- Northland Ins. Co. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 916 S.W.2d 924 (Tenn. Ct. App.) (appellate review of trial court factual findings de novo with presumption of correctness)
- Sherrod v. Wix, 849 S.W.2d 780 (Tenn. Ct. App.) (incomplete appellate record requires assumption it supported trial court findings)
- Coakley v. Daniels, 840 S.W.2d 367 (Tenn. Ct. App.) (burden on appellant to provide transcript or statement of evidence)
- Lee Med., Inc. v. Beecher, 312 S.W.3d 515 (Tenn.) (abuse of discretion standard explained)
- Marlow v. Parkinson, 236 S.W.3d 744 (Tenn. Ct. App.) (custody reversal only when decision falls outside reasonable spectrum)
- Eldridge v. Eldridge, 42 S.W.3d 82 (Tenn.) (same standard for custody review)
- Owens v. Owens, 241 S.W.3d 478 (Tenn. Ct. App.) (equitable division of marital property principle)
- Brown v. Brown, 913 S.W.2d 163 (Tenn. Ct. App.) (trial court’s wide latitude in property division)
- Bilyeu v. Bilyeu, 196 S.W.3d 131 (Tenn. Ct. App.) (trial court discretion on alimony)
- Bah v. Bah, 668 S.W.2d 663 (Tenn. Ct. App.) (child’s best interest is paramount)