Jeanette Rea Jackson v. Bradley Smith
2012 Tenn. LEXIS 812
| Tenn. | 2012Background
- Grandmother Jeanette Jackson sought court-ordered visitation with her granddaughter after the daughter’s death under Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-306 (2010).
- 2009 petition proceeded to two-day hearing; court denied visitation for lack of proof of harm and final judgment entered Oct. 2, 2009.
- General Assembly amended § 36-6-306(b)(4) in 2010 to create a rebuttable presumption of substantial harm when the parent dies and the grandparent is the deceased parent’s parent.
- Jackson filed a second petition in July 2010 relying on the new presumption but the trial court dismissed as res judicata.
- Court of Appeals affirmed; Tennessee Supreme Court granted permission to appeal to address whether the statutory change creates an exception to res judicata, ultimately holding it does not.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 2010 § 36-6-306(b)(4) amendment creates a res judicata exception. | Jackson contends the new presumption allows relitigation despite finality. | Smith argues no exception; final judgment precludes relitigation absent changed facts. | Amendment does not create a res judicata exception. |
| Whether the record was sufficient to decide res judicata given the missing 2009 order in the appellate record. | Jackson concedes prior final judgment and full litigation. | Record deficient but motions and concessions show res judicata applies. | Record adequate; res judicata bars the 2010 petition. |
| Whether separation of powers or finality principles foreclose interpreting the statute to relitigate on new grounds. | Change in law should allow relitigation. | Court must preserve final judgments and respect legislative changes as prospective. | Statute not interpreted to override final judgment; separation of powers upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- Moulton v. Ford Motor Co., 533 S.W.2d 295 (Tenn. 1976) (res judicata honors final judgments despite later law changes)
- Roche Palo Alto LLC v. Apotex, Inc., 531 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (rare exceptions to res judicata after law changes)
- Kremer v. Chemical Constr. Corp., 456 U.S. 461 (U.S. 1982) (new facts or changed rights may defeat res judicata)
- Parnell v. Rapides Parish Sch. Bd., 563 F.2d 180 (5th Cir. 1977) (special sensitivity/public importance may affect res judicata)
- Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc., 514 U.S. 211 (U.S. 1995) (final judgments cannot be retroactively altered by statute)