Raymond Cass Ballard v. Gertrude Cayabas, W2016-01913-COA-R3-CV

Father (Raymond Ballard) filed in July 2015 to modify the permanent parenting plan to make him the child's primary residential parent and also sought civil and criminal contempt against Mother (Gertrude Cayabas).
The parties share a son born in 2008; Mother was designated primary residential parent in the 2011 divorce parenting plan.
Father alleged multiple violations by Mother: taking the child to New Mexico and having the child baptized without notifying Father, obtaining/rescheduling dental care without consulting Father, failing to provide required out-of-state travel itineraries, and failing to pay her share of medical co-pays.
The trial court found Mother had violated the parenting plan (notably the failure to notify of the baptism) but concluded Father did not prove those violations materially affected the child’s well‑being; it denied the modification and declined to hold Mother in civil contempt, though it found Mother owed $100.35 in uncovered medical expenses.
On appeal the Court of Appeals treated Father’s appeals of the civil-contempt and modification claims as timely and affirmed the trial court: no material change in circumstance shown; no civil contempt because Mother lacked present ability to pay at trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Ballard)	Defendant's Argument (Cayabas)	Held
Whether to change primary residential parent	Mother’s violations of the parenting plan (baptism, travel, medical decisions, unpaid co-pays) constitute a material change affecting the child’s well‑being	Existing parenting plan had provided stability; violations did not meaningfully harm the child	Denied — no material change proven; child thriving, stability favored
Whether court should adopt Father’s proposed parenting plan because Mother filed none	Father argued Tenn. Code required adoption or that absence justified adopting his plan	Court retained discretion and found the current plan working well for child	Denied — court not required to adopt Father’s plan despite Mother’s failure to file a plan
Whether Mother should be held in civil contempt for unpaid medical share	Father sought contempt to enforce payment of uncovered medical expenses	Mother lacked present ability to pay at the hearing; contempt requires present ability to comply	Denied — contempt requires present ability to purge, which Father did not prove
Timeliness of appeal on civil contempt and modification	Father argued notice of appeal was timely filed	Trial court clerk failed to stamp timely receipt; trial court later found notice was timely received	Court treated appeals as timely and reached the merits

Kelly v. Kelly, 445 S.W.3d 685 (Tenn. 2014) (standard of review and deference to trial court on parenting credibility and factual findings)
Armbrister v. Armbrister, 414 S.W.3d 685 (Tenn. 2013) (material-change and best‑interest framework for modifying custody)
Kendrick v. Shoemake, 90 S.W.3d 566 (Tenn. 2002) (factors for determining material change in circumstance)
Aaby v. Strange, 924 S.W.2d 623 (Tenn. 1996) (presumption in favor of continuity of placement)
Ahern v. Ahern, 15 S.W.3d 73 (Tenn. 2000) (civil contempt remedial/coercive; contemnor must have ability to comply)
Doe v. Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility of Sup. Ct. of Tenn., 104 S.W.3d 465 (Tenn. 2003) (civil contempt purpose and coercive nature)