ÿWPCòU <¢AÆ‹{ì‚JoùüG—мäzÔ 6­ñê2^9¸›7nì(þ0®¢Ã~¸Ê¡™šqÏàg¦6~Òhe¼Aê!¹û%Ã|ÜÕ–óÈŸèWmG>ñx,ø)¹nÄžm¥ü"°ƒnöì‡Ýö‡ØwËü©ôÖ[z°ç˜À¢mмDz„tž›ý"Èx–H¼ŠÔ‡­Ÿÿ ´µÕïVݨB7YÆÙ§©É¥¬‚ :¼§—AìnJôdD7Õ†ÄKBþ{¤k´š)ø^Ù‚[ûz’ª†ÈЮ ‡ÃžŒäõ6ŒV5"lV€ä²ïÂëìáÀdIwoýTŒ64;³Ñ¿H³©‹Zóø jÛíõìäñ^Qp¾LŽ`AU>îCîCò,D,D,D,D,DEE;8G8G8G8G 0ësHsHsHsH B^I{I 0¤ K D5¯K D-äK 0KLL AS\LƯL 0¤uM 0DN A«]N]N]N]N]N]N]N]N]N]N]N]N]N]N]N]NHO¢PQ˜HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0…*,s »(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularœC#,~1RA~À׫ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó 2Ý ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔDecisions€of€the€federal€courts€construing€analogous€federal€rules€of€procedure€can€provide€helpful€guidanceÐ ° Ðin€interpreting€our€own€rules.€€òòFrazier€v.€East€Tenn.€Baptist€Hosp.óó,€55€S.W.3d€925,€928€(Tenn.€2001);€òòByrd€v.€Hallóó,€847Ð xÈ ÐS.W.2d€208,€211€n.€2€(Tenn.€1993);€òòPacific€Eastern€Corp.€v.€Gulf€Life€Holding€Co.óó,€902€S.W.2d€946,€952€n.7€(Tenn.Ð @ ÐCt.€App.€1995).*+ ÿÿ(_26Ô2ÔÔ3  Ôà..à*G+G ÿÿ(_25Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÓ ¨ý ÓÓ ° Ó SÝ ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThese€statements€led€to€an€investigation€by€the€Tennessee€Bureau€of€Investigation.€€This€investigation€wasÐ ° Ðclosed€in€November€1997€without€conclusive€findings€or€recommendation€for€prosecution.*8+8 ÿÿ(_24Ó  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÓ  Ó Ý ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMs.€Odom€met€Scott€Kiesig€in€November€1997€after€she€moved€to€Idaho.€€She€married€him€on€January€31,Ð ° Ð1998,€and€changed€her€surname€to€Kiesig. ÿÝ ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAccording€to€the€motion,€this€information€related€to:€(1)€Mr.€Odomððs€ð ðpornographic€addiction,ðð€(2)€theÐ ° ÐJanuary€4,€1998€incident€involving€Mr.€Odomððs€service€revolver,€(3)€the€TBIððs€investigation€regarding€Ms.€KiesigððsÐ xÈ Ð1996€charges€that€Mr.€Odom€had€sexually€abused€his€daughter,€and€(4)€other€inappropriate€conduct€by€Mr.€Odom. zÝ ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔOn€November€16,€1998,€this€court€denied€Ms.€Kiesigððs€application€for€a€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€10€appeal€from€theÐ ° Ðtrial€courtððs€November€2,€1998€decision.€€òòKiesig€v.€Odomóó,€No.€01A01„9811„CH„00590€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Nov.€20,€1998). DicksonVaughnBiele TBI S.W.BotsfordMacLeanLombardoHoldridgeRussenberger UhlF.R.D.AcocellaMontaukS.D.N.Y.AvilaMaricopaGuilfordNatlconclusorymovantSchlagenhaufCabanE.D.N.Y. LahrFulbrightJaworskiL.L.P.MarroniMateycontroveryAnsonFickelSclagenbergerCeasar COASandenLevithanchildresPaxil thimc]ourto]rder d]uep]rocess t]hePittsKiesigmootnessAnglinTheatreLaRoucheCrowell Odom*5+5 ÿÿ(_23Ó ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÓ ` Ó üÝ ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€trial€court€specifically€found€that€the€partiesðð€daughter€had€complained€to€Ms.€Kiesig€in€1996€about€herÐ ° Ðhalf„brotherððs€conduct€and€that€Ms.€Kiesig€had€instructed€her€daughter€to€say€that€Mr.€Odom€did€it.€€The€trial€court€alsoÐ xÈ Ðpointed€to€Ms.€Kiesigððs€efforts€to€enlist€the€assistance€of€the€current€Ms.€Odomððs€former€husband.€*2+2 ÿÿ(_22Ó ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÓ ¸ Ó*/+/ ÿÿ(_21Ó  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÓ  Ó*,+, ÿÿ(_20Ó h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÓ h Ó*)+) ÿÿ(_19Ó À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓppÈ xÐ ÓÓ À Ó*&+& ÿÿ(_18Ó  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÓ  Ó*AA ÿÿ(_17Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó*GG ÿÿ(_16Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÓ ¨ý ÓÓ ° Ó*88 ÿÿ(_15Ó  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÓ  Ó*55 ÿÿ(_14Ó ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÓ ` Ó*22 ÿÿ(_13Ó ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÓ ¸ Ó*// ÿÿ(_12Ó  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÓ  Ó*,, ÿÿ(_11Ó h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó pÈ xÐ ÓÓ h Ó- ù-*)) ÿÿ(_10Ó À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€ÓppÈ xÐ ÓÓ À Ó(&& ÿÿ&_9Ó  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€ÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÓ  Ó(AA ÿÿ&_8Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ  Ó(GG ÿÿ&_7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÓ ¨ý ÓÓ ° Ó(88 ÿÿ&_6Ó  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÓ  Ó(55 ÿÿ&_5Ó ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÓ ` Ó(22 ÿÿ&_4Ó ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÓ ¸ Ó(// ÿÿ&_3Ó  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÓ  Ó(,, ÿÿ&_2Ó h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÓ h Ó()) ÿÿ&_1Ó À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓppÈ xÐ ÓÓ À Ó&&& ÿÿ$_Ó  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÓ  Ó ÷Ý ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔFor€example,€a€plaintiff€seeking€damages€for€physical€injury€or€emotional€distress€puts€his€or€her€physical€orÐ ° Ðmental€condition€ð ðin€Ô_Ôcontroversy.ððÔ_Ô€€By€the€same€token,€a€defendant€who€asserts€his€or€her€physical€or€mental€conditionÐ xÈ Ðas€a€defense€to€an€action€places€his€or€her€condition€in€controversy. ®Ý ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔFor€example,€Ms.€Kiesig€could€have€discovered€the€records€of€Dr.€Ô_ÔPittsððsÔ_Ô€sessions€with€the€children€and€couldÐ ° Ðhave€used€these€records€(1)€to€cross„examine€Mr.€Odom€and€Dr.€Pitts€regarding€whether€they€coached€the€children,€(2)Ð xÈ Ðto€obtain€other€expert€testimony€calling€Dr.€Ô_ÔPittsððsÔ_Ô€methodology€into€question,€and€(3)€to€insist€that€the€children€be€calledÐ @ Ðas€witnesses€and€subjected€to€appropriate€examination€and€cross„examination. ÊÝ ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔOn€this€score,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€repeatedly€refusing€to€consider€for€any€purpose€Mr.Ð ° ÐÔ_ÔOdomððsÔ_Ô€conduct€prior€to€the€May€26,€1995€divorce€decree.€€As€we€understand€the€trial€Ô_ÔcourtððsÔ_Ô€reasoning,€the€courtÐ xÈ Ðdecided€that€Ms.€Ô_ÔKiesigÔ_Ô€had€somehow€waived€her€right€to€present€or€even€rely€on€this€evidence€by€signing€a€maritalÐ @ Ðdissolution€agreement€rather€than€insisting€on€a€full„blown€trial.€€We€disagree€with€this€reasoning,€especially€when€theÐ X Ðsafety€and€well„being€of€children€are€concerned.€€Past€behavior€is€illustrative€and€relevant€with€regard€to€a€Ô_ÔpersonððsÔ_ÔÐ Ð  Ðcurrent€psychological€condition. ©Ý ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThis€discovery€may€also€take€place€informally€simply€by€requesting€counsel€to€provide€copies€of€theÐ ° Ðexamination€records.€€It€may€also€be€pursued€more€formally€through€depositions€under€Rules€30€and€31€or€requests€forÐ xÈ Ðthe€production€of€documents€under€Rule€34. |Ý ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔòòVythoulkasÔ_Ô€v.€Vanderbilt€Univ.€Hosp.óó,€693€S.W.2d€350,€356€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1985)€(holding€that€the€courseÐ ° Ðof€pre„trial€discovery€is,€in€large€measure,€left€to€the€discretion€of€the€trial€judge).€€ Ý ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThis€is€especially€true€in€this€case€because€of€Ms.€Ô_ÔKiesigððsÔ_Ô€adamant€denial€that€her€son€had€either€sexuallyÐ ° Ðor€physically€abused€the€Ô_ÔpartiesððÔ_Ô€children€and€her€categorical€refusal€to€consider€separating€the€children€should€theÐ xÈ ÐÔ_ÔpartiesððÔ_Ô€children€be€returned€to€her€custody. Ý ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔUnfortunately,€this€motion€does€not€state€with€particularity€the€grounds€or€legal€authority€upon€which€it€isÐ ° Ðmade€as€required€by€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€7.02.€€Because€it€requests€the€appointment€of€an€ð ðindependentðð€psychiatrist,€theÐ xÈ Ðmotion€could€be€construed€as€either€a€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35.01€or€a€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔEvidÔ_Ô.€706€motion.€€It€is€also€conceivable€thatÐ @ ÐMs.€Ô_ÔKiesigÔ_Ô€could€have€been€seeking€the€appointment€of€a€state„paid€psychiatrist€because€of€her€belief€that€thisÐ X Ðproceeding€was€interfering€with€her€parental€rights. „Ý ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€courts€have€carved€out€an€exception€to€the€mootness€doctrine€for€cases€involving€issues€that€are€Ô‡Eôté òòô PÔcapableÐ ° Ðof€repetition€but€will€evade€judicial€review.€€òòState€ex€rel€Anglin€v.€Mitchellóó,€596€S.W.2d€779,€782€(Tenn.€1980);€òòNewÐ |Ì ÐRiviera€Arts€Theatre€v.€Stateóó,€219€Tenn.€652,€658,€412€S.W.2d€890,€893€(1967);€òòLaRouche€v.€Crowellóó,€709€S.W.2d€585,Ð @ Ð587„88€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1985).€Ô#†ô Pò òEôtéä#Ôô\  `&Times New Roman èÝ ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAs€far€as€this€record€shows,€this€is€the€first€specific€reference€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35.01€in€this€case. Ý ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€support€of€her€opposition€to€Mr.€Ô_ÔOdomððsÔ_Ô€August€1998€request€for€custody€of€the€children,€Ms.€KiesigÐ ° Ðprovided€the€trial€court€with€a€copy€of€a€Ô_ÔpsychologistððsÔ_Ô€May€3,€1995€letter€to€her€former€lawyer€detailing€Mr.€Ô_ÔOdomððsÔ_ÔÐ xÈ Ðadmissions€regarding€these€matters. 1Ý ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThis€discovery€may€take€place€either€informally€by€a€simple€inquiry€or€more€formally€through€interrogatoriesÐ ° Ðunder€Rule€33€or€depositions€under€Rules€30€or€31.(|G2R$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€F´»»d XXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô7Øò»»Ô d †Ý ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔòòRaggeÔ_Ô€v.€MCA/Universal€Studiosóó,€165€Ô_ÔF.R.D.Ô_Ô€605,€608€(C.D.€Cal.€1995);€òòCurtis€v.€Express,€Inc.óó,€868€F.€Supp.Ð ° Ð467,€469€(Ô_ÔN.D.N.Y.Ô_Ô€1994).€€(|3Qa$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€F´»»d XXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Qa$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€F´»»d XXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK >Ý ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔOther€than€Ms.€Ô_ÔKiesigððsÔ_Ô€arguments€and€innuendos,€the€record€contains€no€basis€for€concluding€that€theÐ ° Ðchildren€would€be€exposed€to€danger€if€they€were€placed€in€Mr.€Ô_ÔOdomððsÔ_Ô€custody.€€There€is€surprisingly€little€directÐ xÈ  Ðevidence€in€this€record€regarding€Mr.€Ô_ÔOdomððsÔ_Ô€fitness€to€be€the€custodial€parent. ˜Ý ƒRR$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô Pò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔEven€if€we€were€to€conclude€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€Ms.€Kiesigððs€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35.01€motion,Ð ° Ðwhich€we€do€not,€the€relief€for€this€error€would€not€include€returning€the€children€to€Ms.€Kiesigððs€custody.€€NoÐ xÈ Ðexamination€of€Mr.€Odom€would€undermine€the€strength€of€the€evidence€that€the€childrenððs€circumstances€had€changedÐ @ Ðsince€November€1995€and€that€these€changes€were€material€enough€to€warrant€removing€the€children€from€Ms.€KiesigððsÐ X Ðcustody.€€At€most,€the€results€of€a€psychological€examination€of€Mr.€Odom€would€have€undermined€the€trial€courtððsÐ Ð  Ðdecision€to€place€the€children€in€Mr.€Odomððs€custody.€€Our€decision€in€this€case€does€not€foreclose€the€custody€question.Ð ˜è ÐAs€long€as€any€of€the€children€remain€minors,€Ms.€Kiesig€may€return€to€court€seeking€a€change€of€custody€based€uponÐ ` ° Ðmaterial€changes€in€the€childrenððs€circumstances€occurring€after€December€31,€1998.Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Vœ»»d dÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼Vœ»»»ÔÑ8€3\XXdê»»d 8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îcVœÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼Vœ»îîc #ÔˆÐ Ì ÐÓ  ÓAugust€25,€1999€SessionÐ è8 ÐÔ‡X3\X»¼VœÔÌò òÔ#†¼Vœ»XX3\ô#ÔROBERT€VAUGHN€ODOMòòóó€v.€MARY€JO€ODOMòòóóó óÐ Þ. ÐÌÔ€X3\X»¼VœÔà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Dickson€CountyÐ ø H Ðà@@øøìàNo.€3564„94€€€€€€Allen€W.€Wallace,€JudgeÐ â 2 ÐÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<µ ` AßÐ ¶   ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M1999„02811„COA„R3„CVÐ ¯ÿ  ÐFiled€Ô_ÔDecemberÔ_Ô€5,€2001Ð ™é  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<‚` AßÐ ƒÓ  Ðó óÓ  ÓÌThis€appeal€involves€a€bitter€custody€dispute€over€three€children€between€the€ages€of€nine€andÐ |Ì  Ðfourteen.€€During€the€divorce€proceeding€in€the€Chancery€Court€for€Dickson€County,€the€partiesÐ f¶  Ðagreed€that€the€mother€would€have€custody€of€the€children€and€also€agreed€on€visitationÐ P  Ðarrangements€that€accommodated€the€motherððs€planned€move€to€another€state.€€Several€months€afterÐ :Š Ðthe€entry€of€the€divorce€decree,€the€father€petitioned€to€change€custody€and€to€hold€the€mother€inÐ $t Ðcontempt€for€interfering€with€his€relationship€with€the€children.€€During€the€ensuing€three€years,€theÐ ^ Ðparties€traded€allegations€of€sexual€and€physical€abuse€of€the€children€and€other€misconduct.€Ð øH ÐFollowing€a€bench€trial€in€December€1998,€the€trial€court€found€that€there€had€been€a€material€changeÐ â2 Ðin€the€childrenððs€circumstances€and€granted€the€father€custody€of€the€children.€€On€this€appeal,€theÐ Ì Ðmother€asserts€that€she€was€denied€due€process€by€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€require€the€parties€andÐ ¶ Ðtheir€children€to€undergo€a€psychological€examination€and€that€the€trial€court€unlawfully€delegatedÐ  ð Ðits€judicial€authority€to€a€psychologist€who€had€been€counseling€the€children.€€We€have€determinedÐ ŠÚ Ðthat€the€mother€received€an€essentially€fair€hearing€on€this€custody€dispute€and,€therefore,€affirm€theÐ tÄ Ðtrial€court.Ð ^® ÐÌÓ™Óò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Affirmed€ó óÐ 2‚ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓWilliam€C.€Koch,€Jr.,óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòAlan€E.€Highersóó€and€òòDavidÐ !V  ÐR.€Farmer,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð ð!@! ÐÌJeffrey€L.€Levy,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Mary€Jo€Odom.Ð Ä## ÐÌKarla€C.€Hewitt,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Robert€Vaughn€Odom.Ð ˜%è % ÐÓT ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÐ l'¼"' ÐÌò òI.ó óÐ @)$) ÐÌÓ  Óà  àRobert€Vaughn€Odom€and€Mary€Jo€Fielder€were€married€in€October€1986€in€Georgia,€lessÐ +d&+ Ðthan€one€week€before€Mr.€Odomððs€twenty„fourth€birthday.€€Ms.€Odom€was€already€twenty„four€yearsÐ þ+N', Ðâ âold€and€had€three„year„old€and€five„year„old€sons€from€a€prior€marriage.€€Between€1987€and€1992,Ð è,8(-ý Ðthe€parties€had€two€sons€and€a€daughter€of€their€own.€€Mr.€Odom€joined€the€Dickson€PoliceÐ ° ÐDepartment€in€1993,€and€Ms.€Odom€worked€as€a€part„time€licensed€practical€nurse.Ð šê Ðâ âÌà  àThe€parties€separated€in€October€1994.€€On€November€4,€1994,€Mr.€Odom€filed€a€petition€forÐ n¾ Ðdivorce€in€the€Chancery€Court€for€Dickson€County.€€Ms.€Odom€counterclaimed€for€divorce€andÐ X¨ Ðsought€custody€of€the€partiesðð€three€children€pending€the€trial.€€On€May€24,€1995,€the€parties€signedÐ B ’ Ða€marital€dissolution€agreement€that,€among€other€things,€granted€sole€custody€of€the€children€to€Ms.Ð , | ÐOdom€and€directed€Mr.€Odom€to€pay€$728€per€month€in€child€support.€€Mr.€Odomððs€visitation€rightsÐ  f Ðwere€established€to€accommodate€Ms.€Odomððs€planned€move€to€West€Virginia.€€On€May€26,€1995,Ð  P Ðthe€trial€court€filed€a€final€divorce€decree€incorporating€the€partiesðð€marital€dissolution€agreement.€Ð ê :  ÐÌà  àMs.€Odom€and€the€partiesðð€three€children€moved€to€Parkersburg,€West€Virginia€shortly€afterÐ ¾  Ðthe€entry€of€the€final€divorce€decree.€€Mr.€Odom€soon€married€Andrea€Biele,€a€nurse€with€a€six„year„Ð ¨ø  Ðold€son.€€Ms.€Biele€and€her€former€husband€had€been€friends€of€the€parties€while€they€were€marriedÐ ’â  Ðand€were€divorced€approximately€four€months€before€the€parties€obtained€their€divorce.Ð |Ì  ÐÌà  àLess€than€three€months€after€the€entry€of€the€final€divorce€decree,€Mr.€Odom€petitioned€theÐ P  Ðtrial€court€to€change€custody€and€to€hold€Ms.€Odom€in€contempt€for€obstructing€his€telephone€callsÐ :Š Ðto€his€children€and€for€refusing€to€pay€her€share€of€his€visitation€travel€expenses.€€He€also€alleged€thatÐ $t ÐMs.€Odom,€contrary€to€the€marital€dissolution€agreement,€ð ðrepeatedly€talked€negatively€about€himÐ ^ Ðto€the€childrenðð€in€an€effort€to€destroy€his€relationship€with€the€children.€€Following€a€hearing€inÐ øH ÐNovember€1995,€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€on€January€3,€1996,€denying€Mr.€Odomððs€petition.€Ð â2 ÐÌà  àWhile€this€matter€was€pending,€the€first€of€several€serious€disputes€between€the€partiesÐ ¶ Ðoccurred.€€On€December€31,€1995,€after€the€three€children€returned€to€West€Virginia€from€ChristmasÐ  ð Ðvisitation€with€Mr.€Odom,€Ms.€Odom€and€her€aunt€discovered€a€suspicious€bruise€on€her€six„year„oldÐ ŠÚ Ðdaughterððs€chest.€€On€January€2,€1996,€at€the€suggestion€of€the€West€Virginia€child€protective€serviceÐ tÄ Ðauthorities,€Ms.€Odom€had€her€daughter€examined€at€a€hospital€emergency€room.€€Ms.€OdomÐ ^® Ðinformed€the€hospital€personnel€that€she€was€concerned€about€the€bruise€because€Mr.€Odom€wasÐ H˜ Ðð ðaddicted€to€pornography.ðð׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ms.€Odom€also€informed€Mr.€Odom€that€she€intended€to€commenceÐ 2‚ Ðjudicial€proceedings€in€West€Virginia€to€prevent€him€from€continuing€to€visit€the€children.Ð  l ÐÌà  àIn€February€1996,€Mr.€Odom,€Andrea€Odom,€and€her€son€began€family€counseling€with€aÐ ð!@  Ðlicensed€psychologist€practicing€in€Clarksville,€Tennessee.€€Mr.€Odom€and€his€new€wife€wereÐ Ú"*! Ðexperiencing€marital€conflicts,€and€Mr.€Odom€felt€ð ðstressed€outðð€after€his€children€returned€to€WestÐ Ä#" ÐVirginia€and€by€Ms.€Odomððs€allegations€that€he€had€sexually€abused€their€daughter.€€On€FebruaryÐ ®$þ# Ð7,€1996,€Mr.€Odom€filed€a€second€petition€to€modify€custody€and€to€hold€Ms.€Odom€in€contempt.€Ð ˜%è $ ÐHe€asserted€that€Ms.€Odom€was€continuing€to€obstruct€telephone€visitation€with€his€children€and€thatÐ ‚&Ò!% Ðhe€was€fearful€that€Ms.€Odom€was€ð ðplanning€to€have€him€arrested€on€fictitious€or€manufacturedÐ l'¼"& Ðcharges€when€he€returns€to€West€Virginia€for€his€visitation.ðð€€Approximately€one€week€later,€Ms.Ð V(¦#' ÐOdom€commenced€proceedings€in€West€Virginia€to€stop€Mr.€Odomððs€visitation.€€Following€aÐ ° Ðconversation€with€the€West€Virginia€judge€assigned€to€the€case,€the€trial€court€declined€to€relinquishÐ šê Ðjurisdiction€to€the€West€Virginia€courts.€€As€far€as€we€can€tell,€the€West€Virginia€proceeding€endedÐ „Ô Ðat€this€point€without€a€definitive€conclusion.Ð n¾ ÐÌà  àIn€September€or€October€1997,€Ms.€Odom€and€the€parties€three€children€moved€to€Meridian,Ð B ’ ÐIdaho.€€After€Ms.€Odom€declined€to€permit€him€to€exercise€his€scheduled€October€visitation,€Mr.Ð , | ÐOdom€filed€an€amended€petition€asserting,€in€addition€to€the€allegations€in€his€February€1997Ð  f Ðpetition,€that€Ms.€Odom€had€moved€to€Idaho€ð ðto€deter€or€defeatðð€his€visitation€rights.Ð  P ÐÌà  àThe€partiesðð€three€children€traveled€to€Tennessee€for€Christmas€visitation€in€December€1997Ð Ô $  Ðand€returned€to€Idaho€on€January€3,€1998.€€The€following€day,€Mr.€Odom€became€anxious€about€hisÐ ¾  Ðchildren€and€had€an€argument€with€his€wife.€€When€his€wife€stated€that€she€was€going€to€her€fatherððsÐ ¨ø  Ðhouse,€Mr.€Odom€grabbed€his€service€revolver€and€began€waiving€it€around€to€convince€her€not€toÐ ’â  Ðleave€the€house.€€Mr.€Odom€never€fired€the€weapon€and€eventually€unloaded€it€and€threw€it€on€theÐ |Ì  Ðbed.€€Mr.€Odomððs€wife€summoned€the€police,€and€by€the€time€they€arrived,€Mr.€Odom€had€calmedÐ f¶  Ðdown.€€He€was€examined€at€the€hospital€following€the€incident,€and€he€and€his€wife€had€a€sessionÐ P  Ðwith€their€family€therapist€on€January€5,€1998.€€Mr.€Odom€took€medication€for€his€anxiety€for€severalÐ :Š Ðdays€and€returned€to€duty€following€two€weeks€of€leave.Ð $t ÐÌà  àDuring€the€childrenððs€visitation€in€June€1998,€Mr.€Odom€and€his€wife€decided€to€includeÐ øH Ðthem€in€their€family€counseling€sessions€because€they€were€concerned€about€the€childrenððs€behavior.€Ð â2 ÐThey€specifically€asked€the€psychologist€to€interview€Mr.€Odomððs€nine„year„old€daughter€separately.€Ð Ì ÐDuring€her€first€two€interviews,€the€child€told€the€psychologist€that€her€fifteen„year„old€half„brotherÐ ¶ Ðhad€been€sexually€abusing€her€and€that€he,€in€fact,€was€the€one€who€had€caused€the€bruise€on€herÐ  ð Ðchest€that€had€precipitated€the€sexual€abuse€investigation€in€1996.€€The€girlððs€two€brothers€alsoÐ ŠÚ Ðascribed€conduct€to€the€same€half„brother€that€the€psychologist€concluded€was€physical€and€sexualÐ tÄ Ðabuse.€€The€psychologist€reported€her€findings€to€Mr.€Odom€and€to€the€authorities€in€Tennessee€andÐ ^® ÐIdaho.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àOn€August€7,€1998,€Mr.€Odom€petitioned€for€a€restraining€order€to€prevent€Ms.€Odom€(nowÐ  l ÐKiesig)׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€from€removing€the€children€from€his€custody.€€He€supported€this€petition€with€an€affidavitÐ !V Ðfrom€the€familyððs€psychologist€detailing€the€childrenððs€accounts€of€their€half„brotherððs€sexual€andÐ ð!@  Ðphysical€abuse.€€Ms.€Kiesig€opposed€Mr.€Odomððs€petition,€stating€that€it€was€ð ðtotally€false.ðð€Ð Ú"*! ÐFollowing€a€hearing,€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€on€September€18,€1998,€restraining€Ms.€KiesigÐ Ä#" Ðfrom€removing€the€children€from€Mr.€Odomððs€custody€and€granting€her€supervised€visitation.Ð ®$þ# ÐÌà  àIn€October€1998,€Ms.€Kiesig€requested€the€trial€court€to€appoint€an€independent€psychiatristÐ ‚&Ò!% Ðto€examine€the€parties€and€their€three€children.€€She€also€requested€an€emergency€hearing€inÐ l'¼"& Ðchambers€for€the€purpose€of€providing€the€trial€court€information€indicating€that€the€children€wereÐ V(¦#' Ðin€danger€as€long€as€they€were€in€Mr.€Odomððs€custody.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Following€a€November€2,€1998€hearing,€theÐ ° Ðtrial€court€declined€to€order€an€independent€psychiatric€examination€of€the€parties€or€their€childrenÐ šê Ðor€to€hold€an€emergency€hearing€regarding€temporary€custody€of€the€children.€€However,€the€trialÐ „Ô Ðcourt€granted€Ms.€Kiesigððs€request€for€an€early€hearing€and€set€the€trial€of€all€pending€issues€forÐ n¾ ÐDecember€3„4,€1998.׃è×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð X¨ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€handed€down€its€ruling€from€the€bench€on€December€4,€1998,€following€a€two„Ð , | Ðday€hearing.€€After€observing€that€the€children€ð ðhave€been€through€a€lot€with€their€parents€fightingÐ  f Ðlike€they€are,ðð€the€court€found€that€the€partiesðð€daughter€had€been€sexually€abused€by€her€older€half„Ð  P Ðbrother€both€in€West€Virginia€and€in€Idaho.€Accordingly,€the€trial€court€concluded€that€there€hadÐ ê :  Ðbeen€a€material€change€in€the€childrenððs€circumstances€and€that€the€children€would€be€ð ðin€dangerððÐ Ô $  Ðif€they€returned€to€Idaho€to€live€with€their€half„brother.€€The€trial€court€also€described€Ms.€Kiesig€asÐ ¾  Ðð ðvindictiveðð€and€ð ðmanipulativeðð€and€concluded€that€she€had€even€attempted€to€solicit€perjuredÐ ¨ø  Ðtestimony€against€Mr.€Odom.׃ @×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€After€concluding€that€Ms.€Kiesig€was€untruthful,€the€court€concludedÐ ’â  Ðthat€Ms.€Kiesig€had€moved€first€to€West€Virginia€and€then€to€Idaho€to€frustrate€Mr.€Odomððs€effortsÐ |Ì  Ðto€visit€with€the€children.€Ð f¶  ÐÌà  àBased€on€these€findings,€the€trial€court€entered€its€final€order€on€December€31,€1998.€Therein,Ð :Š Ðthe€court€granted€Mr.€Odom€sole€custody€of€the€partiesðð€three€children.€€The€court€also€directed€Ms.Ð $t ÐKiesig€to€pay€(1)€$170€per€week€in€child€support,€(2)€$2,500€of€Mr.€Odomððs€legal€expenses,€and€(3)€Ð ^ Ðthe€transportation€costs€for€the€childrenððs€visitation€in€Idaho.€€Finally,€the€trial€court€prohibited€allÐ øH Ðpersons,€except€the€childrenððs€therapist,€from€discussing€with€the€children€the€events€that€hadÐ â2 Ðprecipitated€this€dispute.€€On€February€1,€1999,€Mr.€Odom€moved€to€amend€the€final€order€to€provideÐ Ì Ðthat€the€childrenððs€visitation€in€Idaho€must€be€exercised€in€the€absence€of€their€older€half„brother.€Ð ¶ ÐOver€Ms.€Kiesigððs€objection,€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€on€March€5,€1999,€stating€that€the€olderÐ  ð Ðhalf„brother€could€not€be€present,€or€even€in€the€same€house,€when€the€children€were€visiting€theirÐ ŠÚ Ðmother.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€final€skirmish€between€the€parties€began€on€March€23,€1999,€when€Mr.€Odom€requestedÐ H˜ Ðthe€trial€court€to€delay€or€cancel€his€daughterððs€spring€visitation€with€her€mother€because€it€wouldÐ 2‚ Ðcause€the€child€ð ðimmediate€and€irreparable€harm.ðð€€To€support€this€assertion,€Mr.€Odom€attached€toÐ  l Ðhis€motion€an€affidavit€from€the€familyððs€psychologist€describing€the€childððs€reaction€to€the€news€thatÐ !V Ðshe€and€her€brothers€would€be€traveling€to€Idaho€to€visit€their€mother.€€The€psychologist€stated€thatÐ ð!@  Ðforcing€the€child€to€travel€to€Idaho€ð ðcould€well€be€her€undoingðð€because€she€did€not€believe€herÐ Ú"*! Ðmother€would€protect€her€from€her€half„brother€and€that€ð ðit€is€possible€that€[the€child]€could€evenÐ ° Ðhave€to€be€institutionalized€because€of€the€extreme€anxiety,€fear€and€mental€stress€that€she€is€goingÐ šê Ðthrough€as€a€result€of€this€trip€to€visit€her€mother.ðð€€Ms.€Kiesig€opposed€Mr.€Odomððs€request.€€OnÐ „Ô ÐMarch€29,€1999,€following€a€hearing,€the€trial€court€declined€to€delay€or€cancel€the€childððs€scheduledÐ n¾ Ðvisitation€with€Ms.€Kiesig.€€However,€the€court€ordered€that€ð ðif€the€child€.€.€.€becomes€upset€duringÐ X¨ Ðthe€visit€or€if€alternatively€she€expresses€a€desire€to€do€so,€she€is€to€be€allowed€to€speak€with€Dr.Ð B ’ ÐLinda€Pitts,€by€telephone€without€any€interference€or€without€any€ððtappingðð€in.€€If€the€child€.€.€.Ð , | Ðbecomes€upset€during€the€visit,€the€visit€shall€be€terminated€and€the€child€shall€be€returned€to€theÐ  f Ðfather€in€Dickson€County,€Tennessee.ðð€€This€appeal€ensued.Ð  P ÐÌà@……)ìàò òII.ó óˆÐ Ô $  Ðà@Ø Ø ìàòòò òThe€Appointment€of€an€Independent€Psychiatristó óóóˆÐ ¾  ÐÌà  àMs.€Kiesig€first€contends€that€the€trial€court€infringed€upon€her€due€process€rights€by€denyingÐ ’â  Ðher€pre„trial€motion€for€the€appointment€of€an€independent€psychiatrist€to€evaluate€the€parties€andÐ |Ì  Ðtheir€children€as€well€as€her€motion€made€on€the€morning€of€trial€to€have€the€parties€undergo€aÐ f¶  Ðpsychological€examination.€€Based€on€the€circumstances€of€this€case,€we€have€concluded€that€the€trialÐ P  Ðcourtððs€denial€of€Ms.€Kiesigððs€motion€was€not€reversible€error.Ð :Š ÐÌà  àà@‹‹)ìàò òA.ó óˆÐ ^ ÐÌà  àPrior€to€the€adoption€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure,€the€Tennessee€SupremeÐ â2 ÐCourt€recognized€the€existence€of€a€common„law€power€of€courts€to€compel€litigants€to€submit€toÐ Ì Ðphysical€examinations.€€òòWilliams€v.€Chattanooga€Iron€Worksóó,€131€Tenn.€683,€691,€176€S.W.€1031,Ð ¶ Ð1033„34€(1915).€€However,€the€Court€recognized€that€the€courts€should€exercise€this€power€ð ðwithÐ  ð Ðgreat€restraint€and€with€careful€attention€to€the€rights€of€the€plaintiff.ðð€€Accordingly,€the€Court€heldÐ ŠÚ Ðthat€plaintiffs€should€not€be€required€to€undergo€a€physical€examination€unless€the€party€seeking€theÐ tÄ Ðexamination€has€demonstrated€ð ðthat€it€is€necessary€in€order€that€justice€may€be€done.ðð€€òòWilliams€v.Ð ^® ÐChattanooga€Iron€Worksóó,€131€Tenn.€at€694„95,€176€S.W.€at€1034;€òòsee€also€Union€Pacific€Ry.€v.Ð H˜ ÐBotsfordóó,€141€U.S.€250,€259,€11€S.€Ct.€1000,€1004€(1891)€(Brewer,€J.,€dissenting)€(stating€that€truthÐ 2‚ Ðand€justice€are€more€sacred€than€any€personal€consideration).Ð  l ÐÌà  àWith€the€advent€in€1971€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure,€Tennessee€continued€theÐ ð!@  Ðcommon„law€rule€in€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35€which,€then€and€now,€is€patterned€after€Fed.€R.€Civ.€P.€35.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀РÚ"*! ÐTenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35.01€contains€no€limitation€on€the€actions€to€which€it€applies;€therefore€it€isÐ Ä#" Ðavailable€in€any€pending€civil€proceeding€to€which€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€apply.€Ð ®$þ# ÐFew€precedents€construing€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35€exist€because€physical€and€mental€examinations€ofÐ ˜%è $ Ðparties€or€persons€in€the€custody€of€a€party€are€usually€done€by€agreement€without€the€interventionÐ ‚&Ò!% Ðof€the€courts.€€4€Nancy€F.€MacLean,€òòTennessee€Practice€óóðð€35:2€(3d€ed.€2000).€€In€fact,€commentatorsÐ l'¼"& Ðgenerally€attribute€the€ease€of€these€agreements€to€the€existence€of€Rule€35.€€8A€Charles€A.€Wright,Ð ° Ðet€al.,€òòFederal€Practice€and€Procedure€óóðð€2234,€at€474€(2d€ed.€1994)€(ð ðòòFederal€Practice€andÐ šê ÐProcedureóóðð).€Ð „Ô ÐÌà  àAny€type€of€physical€or€mental€examination€entails€an€invasion€of€privacy.€€òòLombardo€v.Ð X¨ ÐHoldridgeóó,€491€A.2d€1125,€1126€(Conn.€Super.€Ct.€1985);€òòRussenberger€v.€Russenbergeróó,€623€So.Ð B ’ Ð2d€1244,€1245€(Fla.€Dist.€Ct.€App.€1993);€òòUhl€v.€C.H.€Shoemaker€&€Son,€Inc.óó,€637€A.2d€1358,€1362„Ð , | Ð63€(Pa.€Super.€Ct.€1994).€€Accordingly,€rules€like€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35€balance€the€interests€ofÐ  f Ðpersonal€privacy€with€the€interest€of€truth€and€justice.€€òòLowe€v.€Philadelphia€Newspapers,€Inc.óó,€101Ð  P ÐF.R.D.€296,€298€(E.D.€Pa.€1983);€òòAcocella€v.€Montauk€Oil€Transp.€Corp.óó,€614€F.€Supp.€1437,€1439Ð ê :  Ð(S.D.N.Y.€1985);€òòAvila€v.€Superior€Court€in€and€for€County€of€Maricopaóó,€816€P.2d€946,€948„49Ð Ô $  Ð(Ariz.€Ct.€App.€1991).Ð ¾  ÐÌà  àTo€invoke€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35.01€successfully,€a€moving€party€must€establish€two€things.€Ð ’â  ÐFirst,€in€the€language€of€the€rule,€the€moving€party€must€establish€that€the€mental€or€physicalÐ |Ì  Ðcondition€of€a€party€or€a€person€in€the€custody€of€a€party€is€ð ðin€controversy.ðð€€Second,€the€movingÐ f¶  Ðparty€must€establish€that€ð ðgood€causeðð€exists€for€the€physical€or€mental€examination.€€Rather€thanÐ P  Ðbeing€mere€formalities,€the€ð ðin€controversyðð€and€ð ðgood€causeðð€requirements€distinguish€Tenn.€R.Ð :Š ÐCiv.€P.€35€from€the€other€discovery€rules.€€No€other€rule€governing€pre„trial€discovery€contains€theseÐ $t Ðrequirements.Ð ^ ÐÌà  àIn€light€of€these€two€requirements,€a€party€seeking€a€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35€order€must€establishÐ â2 Ðmore€than€that€the€physical€or€mental€examination€might€lead€to€relevant€information.€€òòGuilfordÐ Ì ÐNatððl€Bank€v.€Southern€Ry.óó,€297€F.2d€921,€924€(4th€Cir.€1962).€€It€must€also€establish€need.€€4AÐ ¶ ÐJames€W.€Moore,€et.€al.,€òòMooreððs€Federal€Practice€and€Procedure€óóðð€35.03[5]€(2d€ed.€1996).€Ð  ð ÐExplaining€the€significance€of€the€ð ðin€controversyðð€and€ð ðgood€causeðð€requirements,€the€United€StatesÐ ŠÚ ÐSupreme€Court€has€noted:Ð tÄ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThey€are€not€met€by€mere€conclusory€allegations€of€the€pleadings€ð!ðÐ H˜ Ðnor€by€mere€relevance€to€the€case€ð!ð€but€require€an€affirmativeÐ 2‚ Ðshowing€by€the€movant€that€each€condition€as€to€which€theÐ  l Ðexamination€is€sought€is€really€and€genuinely€in€controversy€and€thatÐ !V Ðgood€cause€exists€for€ordering€each€particular€examination.€Ð ð!@  ÐObviously,€what€may€be€good€cause€for€one€type€of€examination€mayÐ Ú"*! Ðnot€be€so€for€another.€€The€ability€of€the€movant€to€obtain€the€desiredÐ Ä#" Ðinformation€by€other€means€is€also€relevant.Ю$þ#` x` x ÐÌòòSchlagenhauf€v.€Holderóó,€379€U.S.€104,€118,€85€S.€Ct.€234,€242„43€(1964).€Ð ‚&Ò!% ÐÌà  àWe€turn€first€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35ððs€ð ðin€controversyðð€requirement.€€A€partyððs€physical€orÐ V(¦#' Ðâ âmental€condition€may€be€placed€ð ðin€controversyðð€in€two€ways.€€First,€the€party€himself€or€herselfÐ @)$( Ðmay€place€his€or€her€condition€in€controversy.׃:×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Second,€a€party€may€place€another€partyððs€physicalÐ ° Ðâ âor€mental€condition€ð ðin€controversyðð€even€if€the€party€him€or€herself€has€not.€€The€latterÐ šê Ðcircumstance€calls€for€a€discriminating€application€of€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35ððs€requirements.€Ð „Ô ÐòòSchlagenhauf€v.€Holderóó,€379€U.S.€at€118„19,€85€S.€Ct.€at€243;€òòFederal€Practice€and€Procedure€óóððÐ n¾ Ð2234.1,€at€480.Ð X¨ ÐÌà  àThe€ð ðgood€causeðð€requirement€in€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35€places€the€burden€on€the€moving€partyÐ , | Ðto€demonstrate€that€the€requested€examination€is€needed.€€It€requires€the€court€to€consider€whetherÐ  f Ðthe€information€sought€is€available€through€other€discovery€techniques€and€whether€the€availableÐ  P Ðinformation€is€adequate.€€òòCaban€ex€rel.€Crespo€v.€600€E.€21st€St.€Co.óó,€200€F.R.D.€176,€182€(E.D.N.Y.Ð ê :  Ð2001);€òòLahr€v.€Fulbright€&€Jaworski,€L.L.P.óó,€164€F.R.D.€196,€200€(N.D.€Tex.€1995);€òòMarroni€v.Ð Ô $  ÐMateyóó,€82€F.R.D.€371,€372€(E.D.€Pa.€1979);€òòEx€Parte€Wal„Mart€Stores,€Inc.óó,€729€So.€2d€294,€298Ð ¾  Ð(Ala.€1999).€€Thus,€requests€for€examinations€under€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35€should€be€considered€in€theÐ ¨ø  Ðcontext€of€the€other€discovery€in€the€case.Ð ’â  ÐÌà  àFederal€courts€have€illustrated€the€sort€of€discovery€process€that€will€lead€to€the€satisfactionÐ f¶  Ðof€the€ð ðgood€causeðð€requirement.€€In€cases€where€a€partyððs€physical€or€mental€condition€is€inÐ P  Ðcontroversy,€the€courts€anticipate€that€prior€to€filing€a€Rule€35€motion,€the€moving€party€will€attemptÐ :Š Ðto€discover€whether€the€party€whose€condition€is€in€controversy€has€already€been€examined.׃Nè×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€If€theÐ $t Ðmoving€party€learns€that€the€party€whose€condition€is€in€controversy€has€not€been€examined,€it€mayÐ ^ Ðuse€the€lack€of€an€examination€to€establish€good€cause€for€ordering€a€Rule€35€examination.€€If€theÐ øH Ðmoving€party€learns€that€examinations€have€been€conducted,€it€can€then€discover€the€records€andÐ â2 Ðresults€of€these€examinations.׃>@×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð Ì ÐÌà  àIf€formal€or€informal€discovery€leads€to€the€production€of€existing€examination€records,€theÐ  ð Ðmoving€party€will€not€be€entitled€to€insist€on€further€examinations€unless€it€can€demonstrate€that€theÐ ŠÚ Ðprior€examinations€are€insufficient€for€its€purposes.€€Thus,€for€example,€a€moving€party€may€be€able€Ð tÄ Ðto€establish€good€cause€for€a€Rule€35€examination€when€it€demonstrates€that€it€has€discovered€theÐ ^® Ðresults€of€the€examinations€already€performed€on€the€party€whose€condition€is€in€controversy€andÐ H˜ Ðthat€the€conclusions€of€its€own€experts€based€on€these€records€is€contrary€to€the€opinions€of€the€otherÐ 2‚ Ðpartyððs€experts.€€òòAnson€v.€Fickelóó,€110€F.R.D.€184,€186€(N.D.€Ind.€1986).€€There€are,€of€course,€otherÐ  l Ðreasons€for€ordering€a€Rule€35€examination.€€For€example,€the€moving€partyððs€experts€may€disagreeÐ !V Ðwith€the€methodology€of€the€other€partyððs€experts€or€may€have€concluded€that€the€prior€examinationsÐ ð!@  Ðare€materially€incomplete.Ð Ú"*! Їà  àProceedings€involving€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35€motions€are€intensely€fact„specific.€€òòFederalÐ ° ÐPractice€and€Procedure€óóðð€2234.1,€at€482.€€There€may€be€circumstances€where€the€pleadingsÐ šê Ðthemselves€will€provide€the€information€needed€to€perform€the€sort€of€analysis€that€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.Ð „Ô Ð35€requires.€€However,€as€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€has€noted:Ð n¾ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThis€does€not,€of€course,€mean€that€the€movant€must€prove€his€caseÐ B ’ Ðon€the€merits€in€order€to€meet€the€requirements€for€a€mental€orÐ , | Ðphysical€examination.€€Nor€does€it€mean€that€an€evidentiary€hearingÐ  f Ðis€required€in€all€cases.€€This€may€be€necessary€in€some€cases,€but€inÐ  P Ðother€cases€the€showing€could€be€made€by€affidavit€or€other€usualÐ ê :  Ðmethods€short€of€a€hearing.€€It€does€mean,€though,€that€the€movantÐ Ô $  Ðmust€produce€sufficient€information,€by€whatever€means,€so€that€theÐ ¾  Ðdistrict€judge€can€fulfill€his€[or€her]€function€mandated€by€the€Rule.Шø ` x` x ÐÌòòSchlagenhauf€v.€Holderóó,€379€U.S.€at€119,€85€S.€Ct.€at€243.€Ð |Ì  ÐÌà  àMoving€parties€do€not€have€an€absolute€right€to€a€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35€examination€of€anotherÐ P  Ðparty€or€a€person€in€another€partyððs€custody.€€òòNewton€v.€Ceasaróó,€No.€M2000„01117„COA„R10„CV,Ð :Š Ð2000€WL€863447,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€June€29,€2000)€(No€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed);Ð $t ÐòòFederal€Practice€and€Procedureóó€ðð€2234.1,€at€478.€€Like€other€pre„trial€discovery€matters,׃?×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€the€trialÐ ^ Ðcourts€have€wide€discretion€with€regard€to€granting€or€denying€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35€motions.€€òòSandenÐ øH Ðv.€Mayo€Clinicóó,€495€F.2d€221,€225€(8th€Cir.€1974);€òòCoca„Cola€Bottling€Co.€v.€Torresóó,€255€F.2d€149,Ð â2 Ð153€(1st€Cir.€1958);€òòNeal€v.€Siegel„Robert,€Inc.óó,€171€F.R.D.€264,€266€(E.D.€Mo.€1996);€òòGreat€WestÐ Ì ÐLife€Assur.€Co.€v.€Levithanóó,€153€F.R.D.€74,€76€(E.D.€Pa.€1983).€€However,€to€exercise€their€discretionÐ ¶ Ðproperly,€trial€courts€must€analyze€each€motion€on€a€case„by„case€basis׃W ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€must€analyze€the€factsÐ  ð Ðand€procedural€posture€of€the€case€in€a€careful€and€ð ðdiscriminatingðð€manner€to€determine€whetherÐ ŠÚ Ðthe€party€seeking€the€physical€or€mental€examination€under€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35€has€adequatelyÐ tÄ Ðdemonstrated€that€it€has€satisfied€the€ruleððs€requirements.Ð ^® ÐÌà@)ìàò òB.ó óˆÐ 2‚ ÐÌà  àWe€now€apply€these€principles€to€the€circumstances€of€this€case.€€The€threshold€question€isÐ !V Ðwhether€the€mental€conditions€of€Mr.€Odom,€Ms.€Kiesig,€or€their€three€children€were€ð ðinÐ ð!@  Ðcontroversyðð€in€this€proceeding.€€Because€the€mental€conditions€of€parents€and€children€are€notÐ Ú"*! Ðnecessarily€in€controversy€in€every€custody€proceeding,€we€must€analyze€the€partiesðð€claims€andÐ Ä#" Ðdefenses,€as€well€as€the€facts€brought€to€the€trial€courtððs€attention€that€might€support€a€conclusionÐ ®$þ# Ðthat€the€mental€condition€of€these€particular€parties€and€these€particular€children€were€ð ðinÐ ˜%è $ Ðcontroversy.ððÐ ‚&Ò!% Їà  àMr.€Odomððs€petition€to€change€custody€rests€€on€two€grounds€ð!ð€the€sexual€and€physical€abuseÐ ° Ðof€his€children€by€their€older€half„brother€and€Ms.€Kiesigððs€repeated€efforts€to€interfere€with€hisÐ šê Ðvisitation€rights.€€These€claims€do€not€necessarily€call€either€Mr.€Odomððs,€Ms.€Kiesigððs,€or€theirÐ „Ô Ðchildrenððs€mental€condition€into€question.€€Either€claim,€if€factually€substantiated,€would€provideÐ n¾ Ðample€proof€of€a€material€change€in€the€childrenððs€circumstances€that€would€warrant€re„examiningÐ X¨ Ðthe€existing€custody€arrangement€notwithstanding€the€parentsðð€or€the€childrenððs€mental€condition.׃B×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀РB ’ ÐAccordingly,€we€find€that€Mr.€Odomððs€petitions€did€not€place€the€mental€condition€of€the€parties€orÐ , | Ðtheir€children€in€controversy€for€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35.01€purposes.Ð  f ÐÌà  àMs.€Kiesigððs€defense€to€Mr.€Odomððs€petition€is€two„fold.€€First,€she€asserts€that€theÐ ê :  Ðallegations€that€her€son€had€sexually€and€physically€abused€his€younger€half„siblings€over€a€two„yearÐ Ô $  Ðperiod€are€false.€€Second,€she€asserts€that€Mr.€Odom€is€comparatively€less€fit€than€she€to€haveÐ ¾  Ðcustody€of€the€children.€€To€support€this€assertion,€she€points€to€Mr.€Odomððs€alleged€adultery€duringÐ ¨ø  Ðtheir€marriage,€his€alleged€addiction€to€pornography,€especially€pornography€involvingÐ ’â  Ðhomosexuality,€bestiality,€and€mutilation,€and€his€mental€instability.€€The€mental€instability€claimÐ |Ì  Ðstems€from€Mr.€Odomððs€continuing€need€for€marital€counseling,€allegations€of€domestic€violenceÐ f¶  Ðand€verbal€abuse,€and€the€January€4,€1998€incident€involving€Mr.€Odomððs€service€revolver.€€Ð P  ÐÌà  àMs.€Kiesigððs€denial€that€her€son€physically€and€sexually€abused€his€half„siblings€does€notÐ $t Ðplace€the€childrenððs€mental€condition€in€controversy.€€If€these€children€have€been€either€sexually€orÐ ^ Ðphysically€abused,€that€abuse€alone,€notwithstanding€their€current€mental€condition,€amounts€to€aÐ øH Ðmaterial€enough€change€in€their€circumstances€to€reopen€the€question€of€custody.€€By€making€thisÐ â2 Ðdefense,€Ms.€Kiesig€is€not€so€much€placing€the€childrenððs€mental€condition€in€controversy,€as€sheÐ Ì Ðis€arguing€that€the€childrenððs€testimony€is€false.€€In€fact,€her€argument,€as€we€understand€it,€is€thatÐ ¶ ÐDr.€Linda€Pitts,€the€family€psychologist,€and€Mr.€Odom€have€coerced€or€induced€the€children€toÐ  ð Ðmake€these€false€statements€about€their€half„brother.€€This€credibility€defense€could€have€beenÐ ŠÚ Ðpursued€without€subjecting€the€children€to€a€battery€of€psychological€tests.׃;è×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Accordingly,€weÐ tÄ Ðconclude€that€Ms.€Kiesigððs€denial€that€her€son€abused€his€half„siblings€did€not€place€the€mentalÐ ^® Ðcondition€of€these€children€in€controversy€for€the€purpose€of€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35.01.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àMs.€Kiesigððs€allegations€regarding€Mr.€Odomððs€fitness€to€be€a€custodial€parent€present€a€farÐ  l Ðcloser€question.€€Notwithstanding€Ms.€Kiesigððs€almost€insurmountable€credibility€problems,€theÐ !V Ðrecord€contains€objective€evidence€that€could€call€into€question€Mr.€Odomððs€mental€condition€as€itÐ ð!@  Ðâ ârelates€to€his€parenting€skills.€€In€addition€to€the€troubling€questions€of€adultery€and€addiction€toÐ Ú"*! Ðpornography,׃<×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€the€partiesðð€pleadings€and€the€pretrial€discovery€demonstrate€(1)€that€Mr.€OdomððsÐ ° Ðâ ârelationship€with€both€his€current€wife€and€with€Ms.€Kiesig€had€required€marital€counseling,€(2)€thatÐ šê ÐMr.€Odom€had€become€so€emotionally€overwrought€that€he€had€been€placed€on€Paxil,€and€(3)€thatÐ „Ô Ðduring€an€emotional€outburst€in€January€1998,€Mr.€Odom€had€wielded€his€service€revolver€in€hisÐ n¾ Ðhome€in€an€inappropriate€and€unsafe€manner.€€Accordingly,€based€on€the€facts€of€this€case,€weÐ X¨ Ðconclude€that€Ms.€Kiesig€has€succeeded€in€placing€Mr.€Odomððs€mental€condition€in€controversy€forÐ B ’ Ðthe€purposes€of€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35.01.Ð , | ÐÌà@‹‹)ìàò òC.ó óˆÐ  P ÐÌà  àWe€now€turn€to€the€question€of€whether€Ms.€Kiesig€established€good€cause€for€subjectingÐ Ô $  Ðherself,€Mr.€Odom,€and€their€three€children€to€psychological€testing.€€Two€considerations€guide€ourÐ ¾  Ðexamination€of€this€question€ð!ð€whether€each€personððs€mental€condition€is€in€controversy€and€whetherÐ ¨ø  Ðother€available€discovery€techniques€would€have€enabled€Ms.€Kiesig€to€obtain€the€information€sheÐ ’â  Ðsought.€€We€have€determined€that€Ms.€Kiesig€failed€to€establish€good€cause€for€additionalÐ |Ì  Ðpsychological€examinations€of€the€children€because€she€did€not€demonstrate€that€their€mentalÐ f¶  Ðcondition€was€in€controversy€and€because€of€the€discovery€tactics€of€her€lawyers.€€We€have€likewiseÐ P  Ðdetermined€that€Ms.€Kiesig€did€not€establish€good€cause€to€subject€Mr.€Odom€to€additionalÐ :Š Ðpsychological€testing€because€her€lawyers€failed€to€demonstrate€that€the€information€they€soughtÐ $t Ðcould€not€have€been€obtained€by€other€means.Ð ^ ÐÌà@¡¡)ìàò ò1.ó óˆÐ â2 ÐÌà  àMs.€Kiesig€and€her€lawyers€knew€many€months€before€trial€that€they€planned€to€counter€Mr.Ð ¶ ÐOdomððs€petition€for€change€of€custody€by€asserting€that€he€was€comparatively€less€fit€to€be€theÐ  ð Ðchildrenððs€custodian.€€Ms.€Kiesig€had€known€for€many€years€about€Mr.€Odomððs€alleged€adultery€withÐ ŠÚ Ðher€best€friend€and€his€alleged€addiction€to€pornography,€as€well€as€the€marital€counseling€in€whichÐ tÄ Ðshe€and€Mr.€Odom€had€participated.׃L@×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€In€addition,€she€had€known€since€at€least€August€7,€1998€thatÐ ^® ÐMr.€Odom€had€taken€the€children€to€Dr.€Pitts,€a€psychologist€specializing€in€child€abuse.€€She€wasÐ H˜ Ðalso€aware€of€the€substance€of€Dr.€Pittsððs€conclusions€because€they€were€summarized€in€an€AugustÐ 2‚ Ð4,€1998€affidavit€filed€in€support€of€Mr.€Odomððs€motion.Ð  l ÐÌà  àMs.€Kiesigððs€efforts€to€discover€the€extent€of€Mr.€Odomððs€and€the€childrenððs€involvementÐ ð!@  Ðwith€Dr.€Pitts€were€far€from€robust.€€As€far€as€this€record€shows,€she€did€not€even€begin€discoveryÐ Ú"*! Ðuntil€November€10,€1998€ð!ð€more€than€three€months€after€she€became€aware€of€Dr.€Pittsððs€activitiesÐ ° Ðand€less€than€one€month€before€trial.€€Instead,€on€October€3,€1998,€her€lawyers€filed€a€ð ðmotion€forÐ šê Ðappointment€of€independent€psychiatrist€and€psychological/psychiatric€examination.ðð׃C×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ms.€KiesigÐ „Ô Ðdid€not€obtain€a€hearing€on€her€motion€until€November€2,€1998.€€While€we€have€no€record€of€whatÐ n¾ Ðtranspired€at€that€hearing,€the€record€reflects€that€the€trial€court€denied€the€motion€at€the€conclusionÐ X¨ Ðof€the€hearing€without€taking€the€matter€under€advisement.Ð B ’ ÐÌà  àWhen€the€trial€commenced€on€December€3,€1998,€one€of€Ms.€Kiesigððs€lawyers€renewed€theÐ  f Ðmotion€for€an€independent€psychological€examination€of€the€parties€and€their€children.€€After€notingÐ  P Ðthe€trial€courtððs€concern€about€subjecting€the€children€to€unnecessary€stress,€Ms.€Kiesigððs€lawyerÐ ê :  Ðargued€that€ð ðat€the€very€leastðð€the€parents€should€ð ðundergo€a€thorough€psychological€examinationððÐ Ô $  Ðaccording€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35.01.׃Gx×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Rather€than€denying€the€motion,€the€trial€court€stated€that€itÐ ¾  Ðhad€ð ðwide€latitude€in€cases€like€thisðð€and€that€it€would€decide€about€additional€psychological€testingÐ ¨ø  Ðand€about€interviewing€the€children€in€chambers€ð ðafter€I€hear€the€proof€in€the€case.ðð€€Ms.€KiesigÐ ’â  Ðrenewed€her€motion€for€independent€psychological€examinations€after€both€sides€rested.€€The€trialÐ |Ì  Ðcourt€again€denied€the€motion,€stating€ð ðIððve€heard€enough€in€this€case.€€Iððve€heard€all€kinds€ofÐ f¶  Ðevaluations.€€I€think€Iððve€heard€plenty.ðð€€Ð P  ÐÌà@¡¡)ìàò ò2.ó óˆÐ $t ÐÌà  àBased€upon€this€record,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€properly€declined€to€orderÐ øH Ðpsychological€examinations€of€the€partiesðð€three€children.€€We€concur€with€the€trial€courtððs€expressedÐ â2 Ðconcern€about€unnecessarily€exposing€the€children€to€additional€stress.€€In€addition,€we€find€thatÐ Ì Ðpsychological€testing€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35.01€was€not€warranted€because€Ms.€KiesigÐ ¶ Ðfailed€to€demonstrate€convincingly€that€the€childrenððs€mental€condition€was€ð ðin€controversyðð€in€thisÐ  ð Ðproceeding.Ð ŠÚ ÐÌà  àTurning€to€the€testing€of€the€parties€themselves,€the€record€contains€no€basis€for€requiring€Ms.Ð ^® ÐKiesig€to€undergo€psychological€testing€because€her€mental€condition€was€not€ð ðin€controversy.ððÐ H˜ ÐWhile€Ms.€Kiesig€succeeded€in€placing€Mr.€Odomððs€mental€condition€ð ðin€controversy,ðð€she€failedÐ 2‚ Ðto€demonstrate€that€the€information€she€sought€to€obtain€by€this€testing€could€not€have€been€obtainedÐ  l Ðthrough€other€means.€€She€also€failed€to€explain€what€she€anticipated€this€additional€testing€wouldÐ !V Ðhave€revealed€or€confirmed.׃q×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Testing€under€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€35€is€not€intended€to€provide€the€sameÐ ð!@  Ðsort€of€fishing€expedition€for€relevant€information€that€is€provided€by€the€other€discovery€rules.€Ð ° ÐAccordingly,€we€cannot€conclude,€based€on€this€record,€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€byÐ šê Ðdenying€Ms.€Kiesigððs€motion€for€independent€testing.׃r ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×à p àÐ „Ô ЀÌà@^^(ìàò òIII.ó óˆÐ X¨ Ðà@¬ ¬ ìàòòò òThe€Role€of€Dr.€Pitts€During€the€Spring€1999€Visitationó óóóˆÐ B ’ ÐÌà  àAs€a€final€matter,€Ms.€Kiesig€takes€issue€with€the€trial€courtððs€March€29,€1999€order€regardingÐ  f Ðthe€Spring€1999€visitation.€€She€asserts€that€the€trial€court€improperly€delegated€its€judicial€powerÐ  P Ðto€Dr.€Pitts€to€terminate€the€partiesðð€daughterððs€visitation.€€Even€though€this€issue€is€moot€becauseÐ ê :  Ðthe€Spring€1999€visitation€has€long€since€concluded,€we€will€address€the€question€because€it€involvesÐ Ô $  Ðthe€sort€of€issue€that€is€capable€of€repetition.׃D( ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ¾  ÐÌà  àThe€March€29,€1999€order€arose€out€of€a€dispute€over€whether€the€partiesðð€daughter€shouldÐ ’â  Ðtravel€to€Idaho€for€her€scheduled€visitation€with€Ms.€Kiesig€during€the€spring€of€1999.€Mr.€OdomÐ |Ì  Ðrequested€the€trial€court€to€delay€or€cancel€this€visitation€because€Dr.€Pitts€had€concluded:Ð f¶  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àWhat€needs€to€be€realized€is€that€with€the€abuse€.€.€.€[the€child]€hasÐ :Š Ðsuffered,€she€cannot€be€expected€to€do€well€in€such€a€short€period€ofÐ $t Ðtime.€€Her€mother€has€taken€no€action€to€show€her€that€she€believesÐ ^ Ðthat€she€was€sexually€abused,€and€in€fact€has€stated€to€the€contrary.€Ð øH Ð[The€child]€.€.€.€realizing€this,€fears€that€her€mother€will€not€protectÐ â2 Ðher€from€.€.€.€[her€older€half„brother]€when€she€goes€to€visit€her€andÐ Ì Ðher€mother€has€shown€her€no€reason€whatsoever€that€her€fears€are€notÐ ¶ Ðjustified.€€The€fact€that€there€is€a€[c]ourt€[o]rder€that€.€.€.€[the€olderÐ  ð Ðhalf„brother]€cannot€be€in€the€house€or€in€.€.€.€[the€childððs]€presenceÐ ŠÚ Ðdoes€not€in€any€way€alleviate€.€.€.€[her]€fears€because€her€mother€toldÐ tÄ Ðher€before€that€she€would€protect€her€from€.€.€.€[her€half„brother]€andÐ ^® Ðshe€did€not€do€so€and€.€.€.€[the€child]€is€terrified€that€her€mother€willÐ ° Ðnot€protect€her€this€time.Кê` x` x ÐÌFor€her€part,€Ms.€Kiesig€responded€by€asserting€that€Mr.€Odomððs€motion€was€ð ðin€effect€asking€forÐ n¾ Ðtermination€of€.€.€.€[her]€parental€rights€without€[d]ue€[p]rocessðð€and€by€assuring€the€trial€court€thatÐ X¨ Ðð ð[t]he€half„brother€will€not€be€in€contact€with€any€of€the€children€during€their€visits€with€their€motherÐ B ’ Ðand€other€half„brother€until€the€court€is€satisfied€that€there€is€no€danger€to€the€children.ðð€€Based€onÐ , | Ðthis€assurance,€the€trial€court€filed€its€March€29,€1999€order€imposing€the€following€restrictions€onÐ  f Ðthe€partiesðð€daughterððs€spring€1999€visitation€with€Ms.€Kiesig:€Ð  P ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àif€the€child€.€.€.€becomes€upset€during€the€visit€or€if€alternatively€sheÐ Ô $  Ðexpresses€a€desire€to€do€so,€she€is€to€be€allowed€to€speak€with€Dr.Ð ¾  ÐLinda€Pitts,€by€telephone€without€any€interference€or€without€anyÐ ¨ø  Ðððtapping€in.ðð€€If€the€child€.€.€.€becomes€upset€during€the€visit,€the€visitÐ ’â  Ðshall€be€terminated€and€the€child€shall€be€returned€to€the€father€inÐ |Ì  ÐDickson€County,€Tennessee.Ðf¶ ` x` x ÐÌà  àWhile€we€find€that€Dr.€Pittsððs€March€22,€1999€affidavit€provided€the€trial€court€with€groundsÐ :Š Ðto€delay€the€spring€1999€visitation,€we€will€not€second„guess€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€permit€theÐ $t Ðvisitation€to€proceed€in€order€to€maintain€the€relationship€between€Ms.€Kiesig€and€her€daughter.Ð ^ ÐLikewise,€we€do€not€construe€the€safeguard€in€the€trial€courtððs€March€29,€1999€order€as€some€sortÐ øH Ðof€improper€delegation€of€judicial€power€to€Dr.€Pitts.€€As€we€construe€the€order,€the€trial€courtÐ â2 Ðdirected€that€if€the€child€became€upset€during€her€visit,€Ms.€Kiesig€should€permit€her€daughter€toÐ Ì Ðspeak€to€Dr.€Pitts€and€should€terminate€visitation.€€If€Ms.€Kiesig€did€not€believe€her€daughter€wasÐ ¶ Ðupset,€then€she€was€not€required€to€contact€Dr.€Pitts€unless€requested€to€by€the€child.€€Thus,€the€orderÐ  ð Ðimplicitly€assumed€that€Ms.€Kiesig,€rather€than€Dr.€Pitts,€would€be€the€initial€arbiter€of€whether€herÐ ŠÚ Ðdaughter€was€upset€enough€to€warrant€further€action,€such€as€terminating€visitation€or€contacting€Dr.Ð tÄ ÐPitts.€€Ð ^® ÐÌò òà@dd)ìàIV.ˆÐ 2‚ Ðó óÌà  àWe€affirm€the€judgment€and€remand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€for€whatever€furtherÐ !V Ðproceedings€may€be€required.€€We€also€tax€the€costs€of€this€appeal€to€Mary€Jo€Kiesig€and€her€suretyÐ ð!@  Ðfor€which€execution,€if€necessary,€may€issue.Ð Ú"*! Ðò òó óÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à_____________________________€Ð ‚&Ò!% Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGE€