What divorce legal professionals simply do not get about enterprise valuation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOFoxHNPpeU The Forensic Accounting Deskbook by Miles Mason, Sr. JD, CPA, revealed by the ABA Household Regulation Part What divorce legal professionals simply don’t get about...

What occurs to a enterprise throughout a divorce?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUIgVnQBTaM The Forensic Accounting Deskbook by Miles Mason, Sr. JD, CPA, printed by the ABA Household Regulation Part What occurs to a enterprise throughout a divorce? Thanks...

We are going to miss Jim.

James J. Webb, Jr. James J. Webb, Jr. Good friend, colleague, and Memphis lawyer James J. “Jim” Webb, Jr., died on Tuesday, November 10, 2020. Within the...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Tennessee youngster custody case abstract in divorce.

Karthik Rajendran v. Mary Florence Rajendran

The mom and father on this Sumner County, Tennessee, case have been married in 2013 and had one daughter who was born in 2015.  The daddy filed for divorce in 2017, and each events requested to be named main residential guardian.

The trial courtroom, Decide Joe Thompson, finally named the mom the first residential guardian.  Initially, the mom was granted considerably extra parenting time.  However beginning in July 2019, the events have been to have equal time on alternating weeks.  The trial courtroom additionally ordered that each one main selections can be made collectively.  The mom appealed to the Tennessee Court docket of Appeals.  She argued that equal parenting time was not within the youngster’s finest curiosity, and that the trial courtroom shouldn’t have granted joint determination making authority.

The appeals courtroom began by noting that trial courts have broad discretion in the case of custody issues.  Nonetheless, a call could be reversed whether it is an misguided evaluation of proof or depends on reasoning that causes an injustice.

The mom pointed to quite a few statutory components the place she believed the decrease courtroom had dominated erroneously.  For instance, the trial courtroom had discovered that the period of time spent by every guardian with the kid was an element that equally favored each events.  The trial courtroom had famous that the mom did, certainly, spend extra time with the kid, however discovered the issue to be equal for the reason that father was in a position to care for the kid’s wants when he did have time together with her.  She additionally took situation with the issue involving love, affection, and emotional ties.

The appeals courtroom famous that it was a detailed query on a few of these points.  There have been no particular factual findings within the report that might make clear these rulings.  But it surely agreed that these components favored the mom.

The mom additionally argued that the kid had shut relationships together with her relations, and that this issue strongly favored her.  Whereas it discovered that this situation wasn’t essentially dispositive, the appeals courtroom discovered that this situation was related.

After sifting by means of all the statutory components, the appeals courtroom finally concluded that 5 components favored the mom, and that zero favored the daddy.  Whereas 4 components have been equal, the appeals courtroom discovered that the components favoring the mom ought to have been given extra weight.

After weighing the most effective pursuits of the kid, the appeals courtroom finally concluded that an equal parenting association was not acceptable.  It famous that there have been problems with distrust between the events, and the trial courtroom had specified the strategies of communication for the events. 

Although it famous that the mom was not fully with out blame, the Court docket of Appeals held {that a} joint parenting association was not workable.

For these causes, the Court docket of Appeals reversed the decrease courtroom’s ruling and remanded the case.  The prices of the attraction have been assessed in opposition to the daddy.

No. M2019-00265-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Sep. 16,  2020).

See unique opinion for precise language.  Authorized citations omitted.

To study extra, see Child Custody Laws in Tennessee.

See additionally Tennessee Parenting Plans and Child Support Worksheets: Building a Constructive Future for Your Family that includes examples of parenting plans and youngster assist worksheets from actual instances out there on Amazon.com.

- A word from our sposor -

Equal Parenting Inappropriate As a result of Contentious Relationship