In the matter of: Laura Ann Campbell

Citation: Not availableDocket: 01A01-9802-JV-00086

Court: Court of Appeals of Tennessee; September 23, 1998; Tennessee; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

A biological father, Mr. Campbell, appeals a juvenile court decision that awarded custody of his eleven-year-old daughter, Laura Ann Campbell, to her former stepfather, Mr. Leegan, following a divorce from Laura's mother, Ms. King. The appellate court finds that the juvenile court failed to provide Mr. Campbell an opportunity to present evidence for his custody petition and did not utilize the appropriate evidentiary standard for awarding custody to someone other than a biological parent. The court vacates the custody order, emphasizing the necessity for a hearing and required findings of fact to support such decisions. The background reveals that Ms. King initially raised Laura with Mr. Leegan, while Mr. Campbell had limited contact and later became delinquent in child support payments, leading to a contempt finding. After Ms. King and Mr. Leegan divorced, the custody of Laura became contentious, especially as Ms. King increasingly withdrew from parenting responsibilities, prompting Mr. Campbell to seek custody in August 1997 amidst ongoing custody disputes.

Mr. Campbell alleged that Ms. King was unsuitable as a custodian for their daughter due to her involvement with drugs and her exposing their daughter to strangers. He had previously had no contact with Laura, questioning his paternity and unable to pay child support, but claimed to have since established a relationship with her and asserted he could provide a better environment. In September 1997, the District Attorney General filed a petition for contempt against Mr. Campbell for failing to pay $15,900 in child support. The juvenile court scheduled a hearing for October 28, 1997, to address this contempt issue, while Mr. Leegan sought custody of Laura. On October 27, 1997, Mr. Leegan and Ms. King amended their divorce decree to grant him sole custody of Rebecca. Following the hearing on October 28, the court awarded Mr. Leegan sole custody of Laura and issued a judgment against Mr. Campbell for delinquent child support, but did not address Mr. Campbell's custody petition. Laura has since lived with Mr. Leegan and his family. Mr. Campbell contended that the custody order was invalid due to inadequate notice of the hearing and the juvenile court's incorrect standard in awarding custody. He emphasized the constitutional rights of biological parents to maintain relationships with their children, which entitle them to due process, including adequate notice and legal representation in custody matters.

A biological parent has the right to maintain a relationship with a nonmarital child, and state interference is only permissible if the relationship poses a substantial threat of harm to the child. In custody disputes, a biological parent should not lose custody unless it is determined, following proper notice and a hearing, that granting custody to the parent would jeopardize the child's safety. The case presents evidence that Mr. Campbell has a parental relationship with his child, Laura, giving him a legitimate claim for custody and the right to be heard in court. However, Mr. Campbell was not adequately notified that custody issues would be addressed during the hearing on October 28, 1997, which primarily focused on delinquent child support. The absence of notice prevented him from preparing and presenting evidence for his custody claim. Moreover, it appears the juvenile court may have disregarded his potential evidence due to prior agreements between Mr. Leegan and Ms. King regarding custody. This failure to notify Mr. Campbell is identified as a legal error. Consequently, the court vacates the custody order in favor of Mr. Leegan and remands the case for a proper hearing to assess Mr. Campbell's parental relationship and the safety of awarding him custody. The costs of the appeal are assigned to Patricia King and David Leegan.