In Re Mattie L., 618 S.W.3d 335

Background

Child born Jan. 2012; parents divorced in Florida with a parenting plan giving Father alternate weekend, holiday, and summer time (initially supervised). Father ordered to pay child support and share school/medical costs.
Mother and child moved to Memphis; Mother married Stepfather; Mother and Stepfather sought Stepfather’s adoption of the child.
Mother registered the Florida judgment in Shelby County; Father fell into arrears and was held in civil contempt and subject to wage assignment.
In Dec. 2016 Mother and Stepfather filed to terminate Father’s parental rights for abandonment (willful failure to visit, willful failure to support, and willful failure to make reasonable/consistent payments) based on the four months immediately preceding the petition (Aug 19–Dec 18, 2016).
Father did not appear at the bench trial (incarcerated nearby); trial proceeded with his counsel; trial court applied the missing witness rule and the equitable doctrine of unclean hands, found abandonment and best interest, and terminated Father’s rights.
Tennessee Supreme Court held: missing-witness inference may be used in bench trials but was misapplied here; unclean-hands doctrine was inapplicable; evidence of abandonment was not proved by clear and convincing evidence; trial court’s termination reversed and petition dismissed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the missing-witness rule may be applied in a bench (non-jury) trial	Mother/Stepfather: Father’s absence justified an adverse inference that his testimony would be unfavorable	Father: No adverse presumption; counsel was present and Father’s absence had explanations	Court: The rule may apply in bench trials as a permissive inference, but trial court misapplied it as a conclusive presumption
Whether the equitable doctrine of unclean hands barred Father from relief	Mother/Stepfather: Father lied in discovery about military service and treatment, so he should be repelled from relief	Father: He defended against a statutory petition and sought no equitable relief; misconduct was collateral	Court: Unclean hands inapplicable because Father sought only to defend a statutory claim and alleged misconduct was collateral
Whether Father willfully failed to support or make reasonable/consistent payments (four-month period)	Mother/Stepfather: Father paid no support during the period and had ability to pay	Father: Evidence showed minimal/irregular income, treatment, and limited ability to pay	Court: Plaintiff failed to prove willfulness by clear and convincing evidence; Father’s minimal income and lack of proof of ability to pay preclude willfulness finding
Whether Father willfully failed to visit (four-month period)	Mother/Stepfather: Father did not exercise court-ordered visits during the period	Father: Mother blocked visitation, demanded money (“no money—no kid”), and refused exchanges	Court: Mother’s coercive conduct prevented visits; plaintiffs failed to prove willful failure to visit by clear and convincing evidence

Key Cases Cited

State v. Francis, 669 S.W.2d 85 (Tenn. 1984) (describing elements and cautious use of missing-witness inference)
Runnells v. Rogers, 596 S.W.2d 87 (Tenn. 1980) (missing-witness rule when party is the uncalled witness)
In re Carrington H., 483 S.W.3d 507 (Tenn. 2016) (parental-rights termination standard and heightened proof requirements)
In re Gabriella D., 531 S.W.3d 662 (Tenn. 2017) (review standards for termination proceedings)
In re Keri C., 384 S.W.3d 731 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010) (definitions of willful failure to visit/support and proof of willfulness)
In re Adoption of Angela E., 402 S.W.3d 636 (Tenn. 2013) (insufficient evidence to show only token support where income/evidence limited)
Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1982) (clear-and-convincing proof required before terminating parental rights)
C.F. Simmons Med. Co. v. Mansfield Drug Co., 23 S.W. 165 (Tenn. 1893) (statement of the equitable maxim of unclean hands)