Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Caroline Smith v. Mark Smith
Citation: Not availableDocket: M2001-00689-COA-R3-CV
Court: Court of Appeals of Tennessee; January 9, 2002; Tennessee; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Caroline Elizabeth Smith appeals a trial court order granting custody of her and Mark O. Smith's two minor children, Jessica Anne Smith and Sarah Jayne Smith, to Mark O. Smith. The original divorce, finalized on June 27, 1996, awarded joint custody with primary placement to Mark, under a decree that prohibited both parents from using drugs or alcohol around the children. Following their divorce, Caroline moved back into Mark's home in May 1999 for reasons disputed between the parties, and they resumed an intimate relationship while sharing responsibilities for the children. In May 2000, Mark faced domestic violence charges from Caroline, which were later dismissed, and he subsequently requested Caroline to leave his home. Despite tensions, the trial court found no evidence that Mark used drugs or alcohol in the children's presence. The court affirmed the custody arrangement, emphasizing compliance with the original restraining order against substance use around the minors. The judgment of the General Sessions Court was affirmed and remanded. Minor children Jessica and Sarah testified that they never witnessed their father or anyone else being intoxicated or using drugs in their presence. The Mother alleged that the Father received and shared pornographic emails, but she also participated by sending humorous pornographic emails to him. The children did not see these humorous emails. Jessica expressed satisfaction living with her Father, while Sarah stated she was also satisfied living with her Father but had no preference for custody between her parents. The trial court, in its December 27, 2000 order, found no material or substantial change in circumstances warranting a custody change from the Father to the Mother. The Mother appealed this decision on March 9, 2001. The appellate court reviews child custody cases similarly to other non-jury civil cases, applying a de novo standard with a presumption of correctness for factual findings unless contrary evidence is present. Legal conclusions do not carry such a presumption. The Mother contended that changes since the divorce warranted a custody shift. However, the trial court found that the Father's drinking and marijuana use were consistent before and after the divorce, negating claims of changed behavior. The Mother claimed to be the primary caretaker upon returning to the Father's home, while the Father asserted he maintained that role. The trial court favored the Father's credibility in its assessment. Ultimately, the appellate court upheld the trial court’s decision, concluding that no substantial change in circumstances justified altering custody arrangements. The case was remanded for further proceedings, with costs of the appeal assessed against the Mother.