HOLLY GENEACE GARRETT V. MARK ANTHONY GARRETT
Court: TN Court of Appeals - April 12, 2013
Attorneys:
Mark N. Foster, Rockwood, Tennessee, for the appellant, Holly Geneace Garrett.
Brett A. York, Crossville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Mark Anthony Garrett.
G. Earl Patton, Crossville, Tennessee, for the appellee, the Cumberland County Board of Education.
Judge: MCCLARTY
This post-divorce appeal concerns the agreed-upon parenting plan designating Mother as the primary residential parent. When Mother registered the Children in a new school district, Father objected. The trial court entered an order requiring the Children to remain in their current school district, despite the Cumberland County Board of Education’s policy providing otherwise. The Cumberland County Board of Education filed a motion to intervene, which was granted. Following a limited hearing, the court designated Father as the primary residential parent, allowing the Children to remain in their current school district per the applicable policy. Mother appeals. We reverse the decision of the trial court.
Modification of an existing custody or visitation arrangement involves a two-step
analysis. First, the parent attempting to modify the existing custody or visitation arrangement must prove that a material change in circumstances has occurred. If a material change in circumstances has occurred, it must then be determined whether the modification is in the child’s best interest.
The determination of whether a “material change in circumstance” occurred requires
a different standard depending upon whether a parent is seeking to modify custody (i.e.,
change the primary residential parent) or modify the residential parenting schedule. The Tennessee Code establishes a lower threshold for modification of a residential parenting schedule.
If the issue before the court is a modification of the court’s prior decree pertaining to custody, the petitioner must prove by a preponderance of the evidence a material change in circumstance. A material change of circumstance does not require a showing of a substantial risk of harm to the child. A material change of circumstance may include, but is not limited to, failures to adhere to the parenting plan or an order of custody and visitation or circumstances that make the parenting plan no longer in the best interest of the child.
To determine whether a material change in circumstances has occurred, the court should consider whether: (1) the change occurred after the entry of the order sought to be modified; (2) the changed circumstances were not reasonably anticipated when the underlying decree was entered; and (3) the change is one that affects the child’s well-being in a meaningful way.
Opinion Located at:
garrettm_041213.pdf
