Getting the new laws
With the Internet, finding and downloading new laws are easy. Discussed here are some of the new laws and how to find them. Public chapters are included with references to the scanned documents found on the web in the Adobe Acrobat format. First, go to the Tennessee Secretary of State’s Public and Private Acts page found at: http://www.state.tn.us/sos/acts/acts.htm. From that page, next load up the particular Public Act described below and find your new law. The author’s intent is to provide a very short summary for quick reference only.

1. 2002 Public Acts, Ch. 565, amended Tenn. Code Ann. §36-4-106, excluding automatic injunctions from applying to named third-parties.
2. 2002 Public Acts, Ch. 616, amended Tenn. Code Ann. §36-6-101(e)(3), allowing courts to punish failure to attend parenting seminars by contempt.
3. 2002 Public Acts, Ch. 629, amended Tenn. Code Ann. Sections 37-2-403, 37-2-409, 37-2-411, and 37-2-415, replacing term of Planned Permanent Living Arrangement for Permanent Foster Care and encouraging early placement.
4. 2002 Public Acts, Ch. 630, amended Tenn. Code Ann. §36-1-102(42), for adoption purposes, adding siblings to the list of related persons.
5. 2002 Public Acts, Ch. 646, amended Tenn. Code Ann. §36-3-601 and §36-3-602, addressing proper venue for protection orders.
6. 2002 Public Acts, Ch. 651, amended Tenn. Code Ann. Sections 36-5-101(a)(2)(B), 36-5-101(a)(4)(A), 36-5-101, 36-5-501(j), 50-2-105(b), 36-6-409(4), 36-4-121(b)(2)(A), 36-5-101(a) clarifying alimony obligations in certain situations, classifying IRA as separate property, and granting wage assignments for alimony obligations.
7. 2002 Public Acts, Ch. 666, amended Tenn. Code Ann. §36-3-617, allowing for filing of petitions for order of protection without filing fee or other related cost.
8. 2002 Public Acts, Ch. 674, amended Tenn. Code Ann. §36-5-116 and §36-5-120(a), requiring state agency to provide monthly accounting on receipts and distribution of child support payments.
9. 2002 Public Acts, Ch. 677, amended Tenn. Code Ann. §36-6-404(a), exempting parents divorced prior to the new parenting plan statute who are entering an agreed order from complying with the new law.
10. 2002 Public Acts, Ch. 769, amended Tenn. Code Ann. §10-7-504, designating that documents filed other than those forms promulgated by the Supreme Court for obtaining a protective order be filed under seal with listed state agencies also having access.

TBA Family Law Section Child Support Committee update
by Jean Crowe

The child support committee of the Tennessee Bar Association Family Law Section met on June 11th by telephone conference. Present were Stuart Wilson-Patton, Barbara Broersma, Steve Cobb, Jim Martin, and Jean Crowe. There was a brief discussion regarding the income shares model for child support. Jim Martin stated that he would like to see the income shares model implemented in Tennessee because he believes clients perceive the income shares model as much fairer than the percentage guidelines. Jim suggested that if clients believed the child support order was fair they would be more likely to a child support as ordered. Stuart Wilson-Patton stated that his research did not support that conclusion. Barbara Broesma stated that implementation of the income shares model would cost the state so much that the state simply could not afford it and Steve Cobb supported that statement by saying that anything that cost the state any appreciable amount of money this year was not likely to pass.

The committee decided to turn its attention to problem areas in the current child support guidelines. After some discussion, the committee agreed to look into six areas where courts have had problems applying the guidelines, where the Legislature is involved, or where the guidelines seem to lead to an equitable results. These areas are:
(1) other children and how they should be considered;
(2) high income cases;
(3) adjustments in the amount of child support being correlated closely and directly with the time spent with the noncustodial parent;
(4) treatment of travel expenses for an out-of-town noncustodial parent;
(5) income of the custodial parent; and,
(6) how to remove financial incentives from the time allocated for visitation.

Each member of the committee agreed to work on one of these areas and bring back to the committee research and proposals to deal with the problem. Since several members of the committee were unable to meet in July, the committee decided to have its next meeting on August 13 at 5 PM.

Return to index

Child support payment
by Stuart Wilson-Patton

Notices
Since October 1, 1999, in response to a Congressional mandate for centralized child support collections, the State of Tennessee has been processing child support payments in well over one hundred and fifty thousand additional cases. There are several advantages to this system for everyone involved. First, for those paying parents who pay through the State, there is no longer any processing fee. Those who continue to pay through the local court clerk’s office are still subject to a 5 percent processing fee on all child support payments. Second, employers who are subject to wage assignment orders for employees who owe support now have one central location in each state to which to send money. Third, there has been greater efficiency and cost savings for everyone because of the centralization and automation of the collection and distribution of support.

Now there will soon be another advantage. The Tennessee Legislature has required DHS to provide payment information with each support payment generated by the system. Beginning in April 2002, this information was included on each check stub and it informs parents of details such as, the amount of the current payment, the date on which the payment was issued, and the total of all payments issued during the current year. Payment information is broken down for each case. The Tennessee Legislature has just elected to change to monthly notices. Acts 2002, Public Chapter 674. Beginning in August 2002, each parent who receives support payments through the State (State Distribution Unit in Nashville) will receive a monthly notice of collection activity. It will show them the payments processed on their case for the entire month and provide a year-to-date total for all support payments processed. Information will be broken down for each case. It will also show if any money was retained by the state and, if so, it will give a reason why it was retained. The purpose of these notices is to help make it easier for parents who receive
support to keep track of the payments they receive. This is especially helpful for parents who receive support payments on more than one case.

Histories
One significant advantage of paying through the State is having a reliable record of child support payments. Under Tennessee law, the Department of Human Services’ child support payment records are prima facie evidence of payment. Tenn. Code Ann. §24-7-121. These records are also admissible into evidence as non-hearsay, self-authenticating documents. This avoids the payment disputes that are so common in direct pay cases. It provides the parties a reliable record of what was paid and when. The goal is to reduce the number of payment disputes that courts have to decide. Of course, such disputes do still sometimes arise.

Whether you are representing a paying parent or a parent who is receiving support payments, you may want to obtain a payment history on the case. There are several ways to do this. The most common method is to request such a payment record from the clerk of the court that issued the support order. Prior to Oct. 1, 1999, when most support payments were processed by Tennessee court clerks, this was often the only way to get such information. For records of payments made prior to 1995 or that were made to the court clerk, it may still be the only option. It is still a viable option, even for cases where the support is no longer being processed by the court clerk. Virtually, all court clerks have access to the child support payment information on the State computer system. They can print this payment information for you upon request as it is a matter of public record.

For cases where the support payments are being made to the State, there are several other ways to obtain payment information. First, it is available upon request from the statewide toll free Customer Service Unit at 1-800-838-6911. Second, if it is a “IV-D case” in which child support services either have been or are being provided through the local child support enforcement office, you should be able to get payment information from that office. They also have access to the payment records on the State computer system which are generally a matter of public record. Third, if you have access to the Internet, you can now obtain payment histories on line. DHS offers such information at http://www.tennesseeanytime.com if you have your client’s Social Security number and the TCSES (Tennessee Child Support Enforcement System or State computer system) case number. If it is a IV-D case, the TCSES case number should be on the latest court order or if not, you can obtain the number from the statewide toll free Customer Service Unit at 1-800-838-6911. You can customize the payment history you need through the website. It will automatically display the payments processed in the current month. You can obtain a payment history for the past six months or even for all payments made (generally back to 1995). Paying parents can obtain a record showing the date a payment was received, the amount received, the amount of any processing fee deducted, the amount of child support paid and whether they have been given credit for the payment. The history automatically provides the total amount paid, the total amount of processing fees and the total amount of child support credited. Parents receiving payments can obtain a record showing the date and amount of each payment received, the amount sent to the parent and whether the check has been cashed. It also automatically provides a total amount of support sent to the parent for the same time frame as the report.

Mr. Wilson-Patton is a Senior Counsel for the Tennessee Attorney General’s Office. He is a 1986 Honors graduate of the University of Tennessee, College of Law. He is a member of the TBA Family Law Code Commission and of the TBA Family Law Section’s Executive Council.

Return to index

10 things you wish you’d told your client …NOT to do
by Barry L. Gold
Isn’t the practice of family law challenging enough, without having to learn all our lessons the hard way?
A close friend of mine is fond of reminding me that “experience is the best teacher, but the tuition is mighty high.”
Like most family law practitioners, I’ve paid my share of “tuition” over the years. In the interest of sharing some of these lessons — and hopefully, sparing others some of the “tuition” costs — I’ve compiled a top 10 list.

This top 10 list is not a “to-do” list. On the contrary; it’s a “don’t-do” list, consisting of the things you wish you had remembered to tell your client NOT to do.

I confess to having learned each and every one of the pointers on this “don’t-do” list, the hard way. That is to say, I actually had a client (or clients) run afoul of one or more of these top 10 don’ts. Some clients even had the dubious distinction of being multiple offenders.

Several of the pointers on the list may strike you as too obvious or silly to justify discussing with your family law clients. And you know, that’s exactly how they struck me, too — right up until I had to pay a little “tuition …”

So here’s the list of 10 things you wish you’d told your client NOT to do. Below each item is an explanation. The explanations are written in first person narrative form, as if you, the lawyer, were speaking directly to your client.

1. Don’t communicate directly with opposing counsel.
You have hired me to represent you, and I take that responsibility seriously. Now that you have retained me, opposing counsel is not permitted to communicate directly with you, except in those very rare instances when I give him/her express permission to do so. It is my job to communicate with opposing counsel. You hired me to serve as your representative, advisor and advocate; please don’t undermine my efforts by attempting direct contact with opposing counsel. Don’t write, e-mail, phone, fax, or otherwise attempt to communicate with opposing counsel. Opposing counsel is ethically bound not to directly communicate with you anyway, and all you will accomplish by attempting such communication is to signal to the opposition that you are agitated, emotional, out-of-control, or unable to contact or communicate effectively with me.

If you aren’t satisfied with my services, and we can’t resolve your dissatisfaction, the solution is to get new counsel, not go behind my back to contact opposing counsel. If you go behind my back and directly contact opposing counsel, you are wasting the fees you are paying me, and you are, in effect, representing yourself.
And you remember what they say about “the person who represents himself,” don’t you?

2. Don’t sign anything without first consulting me.
Okay, maybe that’s a bit strong, but let’s err on the side of caution. There’s a lot at stake here: You have retained me because you are involved in (or anticipate becoming involved in), a dispute/mediation/arbitration/litigation. Regardless of the specifics of your case, it’s an undeniable fact that your legal rights, duties, liabilities, and obligations will be directly impacted by the documents you sign. For example, if you are embarking on (or defending) a divorce case, you must be careful about acquiring (or divesting yourself of) assets/liabilities. If the divorce involves grounds other than irreconcilable differences, you and your spouse will be bound by a statutory restraining order, as well as such other orders as the court may impose. Your actions will be scrutinized, your conduct will be questioned, and you will be operating under legal and tactical constraints that did not previously come into play. In short, you do not have carte blanche to deal with your income, property, possessions, business interests, etc., as you deem fit.

In addition to the scrutiny you will be facing, remember that the act of affixing your signature to a document almost always has important legal consequences. Until you and I have conferred and agreed on how to proceed, I don’t want you signing (i) agreements or contracts (whether formal or informal), particularly if your spouse or spouse’s lawyer prepared it; (ii) anything that might obligate you to pay (or guarantee payment of) new debt, or refinancing/extensions of existing debt; (iii) anything that might have the effect of transmuting separate property into marital property; (iv) State or Federal income tax returns; (v) letters to your spouse/former-spouse/significant other/lover; (vi) changes of beneficiary designation or cancellation of insurance; or (vii) anything else which may negatively impact your case.

Help me to help you. Remember that my power to “do” pales in comparison to your power to “un-do.” Confer with me before you sign anything; it may be too late to un-do the harm afterward.

3. Don’t violate a court order.
You may disagree with a court order; you may think it arbitrary, inadvisable, or unfair. You may believe that an order will be overturned on appeal, or that the order is (or should be) unenforceable.

You are entitled to your opinion. If you take issue with a court order in your case, wait until you and I have left the courthouse, and are back in the privacy of my office, before you express that opinion.

If you want me to ask the court to reconsider, set aside, or modify an order, or if you want to appeal an order to a higher court, I will discuss with you the procedures available for requesting such relief.

What you are not entitled to do, and what you must not do, is violate a court order. You must strictly comply with all of the court’s orders; to do anything less puts you at risk of being held in contempt, and may well tank the rest of your case. In some circumstances, a finding of contempt may even bar you from putting on your case. Contempt can subject you to monetary penalties, and even land you in jail.

TThere’s no faster, more effective way to alienate the court, than to intentionally violate the court’s orders. Don’t do it

4. Don’t make informal, “out-of-court” agreements that attempt to alter/amend/modify/ignore/child support or custody.
No matter how well-intended; no matter how carefully crafted; no matter how many times notarized; it boils down to just this: Out-of-court agreements which purport to modify existing child support/custody orders aren’t enforceable. Period. You must obtain the court’s “blessing,” in the form of an order, before any such agreement is valid and enforceable. The parties aren’t free to work out a “side-deal,” or some other out-of-court “understanding,” that departs from the existing court order. Side-deals are unenforceable, may subject you to contempt, and can create serious problems for you down the road. If you feel that you have worked out a fair modification of an existing court order, let’s discuss it. If the proposed agreement complies with Tennessee law (e.g., the Tennessee Child Support Guidelines), then we can present it to the court for the court’s approval.

5. Don’t “chat” about your case.
Think of it as a kind of Miranda warning for family law litigants: Whatever you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. There are only 3 people in the world you can speak with in confidence about your situation: (1) your attorney (2) your clergyman (3) your psychiatrist or psychologist. NO EXCEPTIONS. Conversations with your lawyer, clergyman, and mental health professional are confidential and generally protected by privilege. Anyone else you talk to —family members, friends, co-workers, spouses, significant others, the lady next to you on the bus— can be compelled to testify about your conversation. It may feel satisfying in the moment to bend your buddy’s ear and fill him/her in on how awful your spouse is, but keep in mind that those words may very well come back to haunt you.

Even after your case is final, show some dignity and discretion. Remember that you don’t enhance your own self-esteem by bad-mouthing your spouse. Think about it. If your spouse is as bad as you now claim, how could you have been so stupid to marry this person in the first place? Besides, you may well be violating Tennessee law (Tenn. Code Ann. §36-6-101) and your Permanent Parenting Plan by “downing” your spouse (each parent has “the right to be free of unwarranted derogatory remarks made about such parent or such parent’s family by the other parent to or in the presence of the child”).

6. Don’t contact witnesses without first consulting with me.
Don’t misunderstand — I’m grateful for your help in getting your case ready, and you will often save yourself some legal fees by handling some of the “leg work” involved in preparing your case for hearing.
But please don’t contact witnesses or potential witnesses without first consulting with me. This is especially true if the witness is not really a “known quantity,” that is to say, the witness may turn out to be uncooperative, adverse, or even hostile.

Statements you make to a witness (or statements which the witness claims you made) can be used against you. The truly hostile witness might even claim that you coerced, harassed, bribed, or threatened him/her, or that you tried to induce the witness to lie. Even if the witness is not adverse, he/she may be more receptive to speaking with me, the lawyer, than with you, the litigant.

I may also be able to determine from speaking with the witness that we really don’t want to subpoena the witness to court, or conversely, that the witness has information that may be more helpful than what we originally contemplated.

Let’s review your potential witness list together, discuss the “knowns” and “unknowns,” and then decide who will contact each potential witness.

7. Don’t delay telling me bad news.
I can’t help you, and can’t advocate effectively for you, unless I know what is going on. This means that when it comes to your case, I need to know the good, the bad, and the ugly.

I understand the natural reluctance to share bad news; you may be embarrassed, you may be afraid, you may be ashamed, you may be upset, and you probably don’t feel like talking. You may have ignored my advice, broken a promise, broken the law, or done something you agreed not to do; in any case, you’re now facing some bad news.

Unlike fine wine, bad news typically does not improve with age. The sooner you make me aware of the problem, the sooner I can be in a position to deal with it. I can’t help you if I’m not apprised of the problem. Don’t delay telling me bad news.

8. Don’t give away our strategy.
You are paying good money for me to help you with your case. An essential part of the service I render is to analyze the facts of your case, consider the applicable law and the equity of your situation, assess the availability and credibility of the anticipated proof (witnesses, documents, exhibits), and reach a decision as to how best to proceed based upon this information (and a host of other factors).

The process of strategizing is an ongoing process, subject to frequent review and reconsideration as facts and information become available (or unavailable). This process is involved in every aspect of your case: from the initial pleadings, to the discovery process, settlement negotiations, mediation, trial, post-trial motions, and even an appeal.
I want and need your input in this process. It’s your case, and I want us to be “on the same page” throughout the representation. Our strategy discussions are critical, and they are protected by the attorney-client privilege…unless you choose to disclose them.

Let’s put this bluntly: Unless you want to cripple your case, never, ever give away our strategy.

You’re probably wondering, “who could be so naïve (or just plain dumb) as to give away his/her lawyer’s strategy for handling the case?” Isn’t that like giving the other team a copy of your team’s playbook, right before the big game?

It’s astonishing how often (and how unwittingly) a client will reveal his/her lawyer’s strategy. Often the disclosure comes in a fit of anger, right after negotiations have collapsed: “Well, I didn’t want this to get ugly, but since you aren’t willing to be reasonable, the gloves are coming off; we’re going to drag your ex-whatever into court to testify about the time that (fill in the blanks)…”

Sometimes the disclosure is more subtle: “You think you’re so smart, but my lawyer tells me that you can’t prove you’re entitled to share the XYZ Corporation stock because you haven’t listed a records custodian on your witness list…”

Or the disclosure may come when the client is trying to negotiate a resolution directly with his/her spouse: “Well, I know we’ve valued the house at $150,000 on my asset and liability statement, but we’re willing to back off that number to get the case settled.”

My favorite was the client who actually told his spouse that “if we don’t get this settled, my lawyer is going to call you as the very first witness at trial, to catch you by surprise. He said you’d never be expecting it.”

9. Don’t move without complying with the relocation statute.
Divorced/divorcing parents with minor children, please take this to heart.

Get a copy of Tenn. Code Ann. §36-6-108, the Tennessee Parental Relocation statute.

Read it. Read it again. Put it in a safe place, for future reference.

If you are contemplating relocation, or if you have decided to relocate, and you will be moving more than 100 miles from the other parent (or anywhere outside the State of Tennessee, regardless of how far from the other parent), we need to discuss your obligations under the Parental Relocation statute.

The more lead time we have to discuss your compliance with the statute, the better. It is far better (and less expensive) to comply with the statute, than it is to deal with the consequences of non-compliance.

10. Don’t overlook the value of mediation.
Within the last five years (primarily due to Tennessee’s new parenting laws), the use of mediation in family law disputes has become the norm.

Some lawyers tell their clients that mediation is a “pro forma” step in the divorce process; it’s one of those inconvenient things you have to get out of the way, so that you can get your day in court. I’ve actually heard a lawyer tell his client that “it’s just mediation; you don’t have to agree to anything and we can leave after a few minutes, just so long as we can tell the judge that we showed up.”

It’s a serious mistake to treat mediation as a procedural hurdle that has to be grudgingly cleared, in order to get to the “real business” of litigating your case. If you do so, you are sabotaging what could well be the best way of resolving your case (i.e., the fastest, most amicable, least expensive, and least contentious resolution).

Mediation is not some “fad” or “trend.” It’s a well-documented, well-recognized method for attempting to resolve disputes by taking a collaborative, rather than a combative, approach. Many clients find that mediation provides a unique, confidential opportunity to “tell their story” and express their concerns, without being subjected to cross-examination and without having to prepare for or deal with the formalities, constraints, and risks associated with testifying in court.

Even if you don’t settle your case at the mediation, you may well lay the ground work for ultimately settling some or all of the case.

Don’t overlook the value of mediation. Approach it as an opportunity to resolve some or all of your case, without the expense, aggravation, risk, and formality, of the courtroom.

Barry Gold is a partner with the Chattanooga law firm of McKoon, Billings, Gold & Presley PC, practicing primarily in family law and civil litigation. He received his bachelor’s degree, magna cum laude, and law degree, cum laude, from the University of Georgia where he was elected to the Order of Barristers. He was admitted to practice law in Georgia and Tennessee in 1983, and is a member of the ABA, TBA, and Georgia State Bar family law sections. Gold is a frequent lecturer on family law topics before a variety of professional groups, and he is also a Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 31 family law mediator.

Return to index

ABA Family Law Section update
by Sharon L, Corbitt

I have had the privilege of serving the American Bar Association Section of family law as its chair since August 2001. My term of office will conclude this August at the Annual Meeting in Washington, D.C. Reviewing the accomplishments of our section over the past year has reminded me once again how much involvement in the Family Law Section can enhance one’s individual practice. The opportunity to network with nationally known practitioners in and of itself is an incredible opportunity. However, working with others in effecting national change and determining the face of the future of family law is indeed even more exciting.

In September 2001, the section of family law had the privilege of being one of the co-sponsors of the Third World Congress on the Rights of Children held in Bath, England. A number of our section members were involved in the program either as speakers or moderators. That was only the beginning of a number of events and accomplishments by the section and its members during this past year. I will enumerate only a few of them:

* The section has been actively involved in lobbying efforts at Congress regarding HR 333, the Bankruptcy Bill.

* Section member Harlan Tenenbaum received the Angel of Adoption Award from Congress.

* The section was involved in the creation of the ABA Unified Family Courts Project.

* In spite of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, the section of family law was one of the few sections that held a well-attended, successful meeting. That meeting took place in Vancouver, British Columbia just weeks after the attacks.

When other sections were having to cancel or having poor numbers, this shows the level of interest and dedication of our members. This meeting included a very productive joint meeting between the Council of the Section of Family Law and the governing body of the Canadian Bar Association Family Law Section.

* Mark Sullivan and the Military Law Committee spearheaded the Section’s 9-11 response by drafting and making available to the public handouts for military personnel about to be mobilized.

* The Child Custody Pro Bono Project of the Section of Family Law gave its first grants totaling $40,000. This project also has held several successful CLE and education sessions and is hosting a Presidential Showcase CLE at the ABA Annual Meeting.

* During this year, the section recognized outstanding individuals, among them Justice Florence Murray, retired Justice of the Rhode Island Supreme Court, for her role in bringing the Unified Family Courts concept into reality; Dave Thomas, founder of Wendy’s restaurants, who will be given a posthumous award for his adoption advocacy efforts through the Dave Thomas Foundation; and Louise B. Raggio will be honored for her lifetime achievements, including a law career spanning nearly five decades and including numerous awards, among them the prestigious Margaret Brent Award.

* The section has worked tirelessly with the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) and other sections within the ABA on the Uniform Parentage Act.

* The section designated a representative to serve on the Center for Children and the Law’s Drafting Committee for “Standards for Attorneys Who Represent Child Welfare Agencies.”

* The section sent a representative to work on the Drafting Committee for NCCUSL’s Child Witness Testimony by Alternative Methods Act

* The section continued to communicate section news and events to enrolled section Members through its listserv.

* The section co-sponsored NCCUSL’s successful 2001 Amendments to the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act.

* The section co-sponsored NCCUSL’s Model Mediation Act which was adopted by the ABA House of Delegates.

* The section sent a delegation to ABA Day in Washington in May where our representatives lobbied on issues such as the Bankruptcy Bill and the re-authorization of the Personal Responsibility Act.

* The publication board produced the first Collaborative Law book. The author, Pauline Tesler, is being honored by the Section of Dispute Resolution, as one of the country’s “Problem Solving Lawyers of the Year.”

* The section produced a number of successful publications, among them a Client Handbook on Dispute Resolution; “The Lawyer’s Business Valuation Handbook” authored by Shannon Pratt; and the highly successful “Attacking and Defending Marital Agreements.”

* Active section member and council member Susan Wolfson was honored by the Connecticut State Bar.

These are but a few of the many things that have been going on within the Family Law Section during the past year. I encourage those of you who are not members to join. Our member publications alone are worth the price of membership. The Family Advocate is published quarterly and is a practical, hands-on magazine. Our more scholarly publication, the Family Law Quarterly, includes the often-cited “Law in the Fifty States” issue that is widely quoted.

It has been interesting to be on the front lines as the changes in family law have unfolded over the years. We have moved from surrogacy to a number of conception alternatives; we have seen the trend change from sole custody to joint, and are now seeing a re-examination of at least some aspects of shared parenting. We have watched mediation go from an idea to an often successful reality; we have seen the advent of parent education programs and parent coordinators. And, we have seen expansion of the concept of Unified Family Courts to reality in a number of states.

To keep in touch, stay tuned to the ABA Family Law Section! For more information, please feel free to contact our section director Lynn Miller at (312)988-5619, or at millerl@staff.abanet.org.

Thank you for this opportunity to address your Tennessee Bar Association Section of Family Law. n

Sharon L. Corbitt is the chair of the American Bar Association Family Law Section. She previously served the section as chair-elect, vice-chair, secretary, CLE chair, and liaison from the Family Law Section to the ABA Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Profession and to the Commission on Women. Sharon was voted Outstanding Family Law Attorney by the Oklahoma Bar Association Family Law Section in 1993 and again in 1995. Sharon is a past chair of the Oklahoma Bar Association Family Law Section.

Return to index