Gehlen Liebetreu v. Sandra Liebetreu, M2021-00623-COA-R3-CV

Father (U.S. service member) and Mother (German national) married; two children born in U.S.; Mother took the children to Germany in May 2019 and refused to return in August 2019. A German Hague proceeding found Mother unlawfully abducted and retained the children; after losing her appeal she returned them to Father.
Father filed for divorce in Tennessee (Nov. 2019). The trial court named Father primary residential parent, found Mother had abducted the children, and ordered remedies including retroactive child support and an award of Father’s attorney’s fees.
Despite the abduction, the trial court awarded Mother two months of unsupervised summer visitation in Germany, conditioned on an Abduction Prevention Order: posting a $50,000 bond (security), completing education about harms of abduction, surrendering German passports, and not applying for replacements.
Mother moved to alter the bond requirement and to reduce the fee award; the trial court denied relief. Father sought a Rule 7 stay from this Court to block Mother’s travel; this Court denied the stay but directed reimbursement for travel expenses caused by the temporary stay.
On remand the trial court awarded Mother $14,540.20 in travel-related expenses, including $4,500 in attorney’s fees, and offset that amount against funds Mother had deposited to secure Father’s fee award. Father appealed.

Issue	Father’s Argument	Mother’s Argument	Held
Whether trial court abused its discretion by granting Mother unsupervised two‑month summer visitation in Germany	Mother is a high abduction risk; unsupervised international visitation and $50,000 bond are insufficient to prevent re‑abduction	Trial court properly exercised discretion; imposed statutory abduction‑prevention conditions (bond, education, passport surrender) and visitation rights favored absent clear danger	Affirmed — no abuse of discretion; conditions under Tenn. Code Ann. §36‑6‑608(d) appropriate and statute does not require complete denial of international visitation
Whether trial court erred by including $4,500 in attorney’s fees in Mother’s reimbursement for expenses caused by the temporary stay	This Court’s Rule 7 order authorized reimbursement only for "additional, unavoidable travel expenses," not attorney’s fees	Counsel’s work was necessary to facilitate visitation after the temporary stay; fees reasonable and caused by the stay	Reversed in part — trial court exceeded remand scope by awarding $4,500 in attorney’s fees; travel expense award otherwise affirmed
Whether Father is entitled to appellate attorney’s fees under Tenn. Code Ann. §36‑5‑103(c)	Prevailing party on appeal should recover fees	Opposes fee award; equitable factors do not favor fees to Father	Denied — appellate fees not awarded (exercise of this Court’s discretion)

Suttles v. Suttles, 748 S.W.2d 427 (Tenn. 1988) (trial court has broad discretion in custody/visitation; child’s welfare paramount)
Eldridge v. Eldridge, 42 S.W.3d 82 (Tenn. 2001) (abuse‑of‑discretion standard; appellate court will not substitute its judgment)
Gooding v. Gooding, 477 S.W.3d 774 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2015) (standards for reversing discretionary custody/visitation rulings)
Lee Med., Inc. v. Beecher, 312 S.W.3d 515 (Tenn. 2010) (discussion of appellate review and standards for abuse of discretion)
Luke v. Luke, 651 S.W.2d 219 (Tenn. 1983) (child welfare as paramount consideration in custody decisions)