Dad Wins Custody Over Mom With Six Kids in Studio Apartment

The child in this Rutherford County, Tennessee, case was born out of wedlock in 2019.  They mutually agreed on a co-parenting schedule without court involvement, but in 2021, the father filed a petition to establish a permanent parenting plan.

The father requested equal parenting time on an alternating biweekly schedule.  While the case was pending, the mother enrolled the child in preschool, and she requested the majority of the parenting time.

A hearing was held in 2023 before Judge Darrell Scarlett, and both parents testified.  The father’s testimony focused on the difficulty of communications he had with the mother.  For example, he requested the child’s social security number in order to sign the child up under his insurance plan, but this request was unanswered.  He also pointed out that the mother had six children aged 6 months to 15 years, but resided in a studio apartment, and had moved three times since the child’s birth.

The mother testified that the apartment was on a 62 acre farm where she worked, and she enjoyed working around the farm with the children.

Judge Scarlett ruled in favor of the father and named him primary residential parent, with sole decision-making authority.  The mother was awarded 100 days per year of parenting time.  In so holding, he found the father’s testimony to be more credible.  After some post-trial motions, the mother appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

The Court of Appeals began by noting the relevant standard of review, and pointing out that custody determinations are based upon the relevant statutory factors.  The welfare and best interests of the child are always paramount in these decisions.

The appeals court reviewed the evidence.  It noted that some of the factors came down evenly or were inapplicable.  But critically, it found that the father was significantly more likely to facilitate the parent-child relationship with mother.  For example, it pointed to the mother’s failure to provide the child’s social security number when the father tried to enroll the child in health insurance.

The lower court found that the child’s behavior reflected a need for attention and stability, which the father could provide.  The appeals court agreed.  It found that the mother’s living environment was not “inherently unsatisfactory,” but it still raised concerns as to the child’s best interests.

After reviewing all of the lower court’s findings, the appeals court concluded that it had acted properly.  Therefore, it affirmed the judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

The opinion of the Court of Appeals was authored by Judge John W. McClarty, and joined by Judges Frank G. Clement and Kenny Armstrong.

No. M2024-00303-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 25, 2025).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Child Custody Laws in Tennessee and our video, How is child custody determined in Tennessee?

To learn more, see Modifying Custody & Parenting Plans and our video, How is child custody determined in Tennessee?

See also Tennessee Parenting Plans and Child Support Worksheets: Building a Constructive Future for Your Family featuring examples of parenting plans and child support worksheets from real cases available on Amazon.com.