375 S.W.3d 268
Tenn. Ct. App.2012Background
- Divorce of Patrick Reeder and Jo Beth Curtis finalized March 9, 2000; Mother awarded primary custody, Father granted 110 days of visitation, and Father obligated to pay $225/week child support.
- Two children: Bryan (turned 18 in 2008) and Courtney (age 4 at divorce; age 14 in 2009).
- Initially, MDA allowed Father visitation and support; the parties informally changed payment to $450 biweekly without court approval.
- In Spring 2002, Father was injured and out of work for 19 weeks, paying $100/week during that period and not making up the arrearage (then $2,375).
- 2003 Agreed Order resolved most issues but did not resolve the $2,375 arrearage; subsequent mediation on arrearage never occurred; Father’s visitation diminished as children engaged in activities.
- May 2009: Father petitioned to reduce support after Bryan’s emancipation; trial court ultimately modified parenting plan for Courtney (effective August 1, 2010) with 92 days of Father’s parenting time, a $680 monthly child support amount (including a $33 upward deviation for cheerleading), wage assignment, and a special provision to address visitation refusals.
- Trial court found a material change in circumstances due to Courtney’s age/activities and Father’s reduced visitation; court also addressed 2002 arrearage and awarded Mother attorney fees; on appeal, Father challenged several aspects of the plan and arrearage decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Upward deviation for cheerleading expenses | Reeder argues deviation unsupported; cheerleading not a valid special expense. | Reeder argues deviation justified by special expenses. | Deviations properly justified; cheerleading constitutes a special expense and the amount is modest. |
| Retroactive application of reduced support to Bryan’s emancipation date | Reeder seeks reduction retroactive to June 1, 2008. | Mother contends no retroactive reduction; deviation applies to Courtney. | Court may deviate for Courtney; not required to apply retroactively to Bryan’s emancipation; credit for overages determined. |
| Modifications to parenting plan (visitation and major decisions) | Father objects to elimination of weekday/Christmas Eve visitation and broad changes not requested by either party. | Modifications reflect Courtney’s age, needs, and enhanced stability; intended to improve relationship. | Court’s modifications within broad discretion; not an abuse of discretion. |
| Contempt for 2002 arrears | Mother seeks contempt and arrears; Father argues no willful violation due to job loss. | Father asserts inability to pay; not willful. | Contempt reversed; arrearage remains payable; not willful misconduct. |
| Prejudgment interest on arrearage | Mother entitled to prejudgment interest under § 36-5-101(f)(1). | Discretion to award prejudgment interest. | Prejudgment interest mandatory from arrearage dates; remand to calculate. |
Key Cases Cited
- Richardson v. Spanos, 189 S.W.3d 720 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005) (presumptive amount may be Deviated; standard of review for deviations)
- Taylor v. Fezell, 158 S.W.3d 352 (Tenn. 2005) (deviation framework under child support guidelines)
- Perry v. Perry, 114 S.W.3d 465 (Tenn. 2003) (discretion to deviate from guidelines requires written findings)
- Bogan v. Bogan, 60 S.W.3d 721 (Tenn. 2001) (custody/visitation decisions reviewed for reasonableness)
- Corder v. Corder, 231 S.W.3d 346 (Tenn. 2006) (guidelines deviations when emancipation of one child affects remaining child)