ÿWPC" :# <UNG %• 04› 0³Ïb‚ 0DŠNÎ,Ðw@ü4<Pj_É 0JË 0T mi 0^€ AQÞ 0h/ 0r— 0| 0†… 0 1u› BÆ- 0Dó 0@7 0Dw 0d» D/ BN D3kU>žB)ÜDC AMHU*•J¿« º´Fnv~´vÓ2˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlÎ'í€"  Z 6Times New Roman Regular¼( ¤U$¡¡Ó  Ó(c(2Œu$¤¤Ý ƒ¤U!ÝÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X¾ÛX¼¼Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù-(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóWAYNESBOROWEATHERFORDKozlowski Juvarrearages KaneMeighan CommTurpinSavenaGranthamHazzard Crim KiddGouvitsa ½ ¾ D¿ À DÁ D Dà [eÄ Å Ó€Ï ê‚_#',ð,,3|xÏ state ex rel whitehead v. thompson Í  & '  0 .   2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô!"#$&Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a) dƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd 'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d00007Border 1dd!#1Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial @Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€/ÔÔ€/¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€3ÔÔ€3ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€3XÔÌÌDecember€5,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó ¡Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€/ÔÔ€/¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€/XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Smithsðð€petition€does€not€technically€comply€with€Tenn.€R.€Ô_ÔJuvÔ_Ô.€P.€9€because€it€doesÏnot€allege€specifically€that€the€child€was€ð ðdependent€and€neglected.ðð€€However,€the€substance€of€theÏpetition€indicates€that€the€Smiths€were€asserting€that€the€child€was€dependent€and€neglected€becauseÏMs.€Thompson€was€not€providing€proper€care.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„102(b)(12)(C)Ï(1996).Ì °Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€/ÔÔ€/¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€/XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThese€petitions€have€not€been€included€in€the€appellate€record.€€Based€on€theÏrepresentation€in€the€partiesðð€briefs,€we€presume€that€the€Department€had€standing€to€assert€theseÏsupport€claims€because€the€child€had€been€receiving€AFDC€support€and€because€Ms.€ThompsonÏhad€assigned€her€support€rights€to€the€state€as€required€by€federal€and€state€law.€€òòSeeóó€42€U.S.C.€ððÏ602(a)(26)(A)€(1988);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€71„3„124(a)€(Supp.€1997).€€Ì <Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€/ÔÔ€/¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€/XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔOf€course,€the€chancery€court€had€jurisdiction€to€consider€the€Departmentððs€petition€toÏrequire€Mr.€Whitehead€to€pay€child€support€because€the€chancery€court€was€the€first€court€toÏrequire€Mr.€Whitehead€to€pay€child€support€and€because€the€juvenile€court€did€not€have€jurisdictionÏover€Mr.€Whiteheadððs€child€support€obligation.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€/ÔÔ€/¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ „ ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ_ÔÑ€ÑÑ7€ÆÉ¼¼dXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€/„Ôò ò›Þ ÞÌÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÙ€!ÙœßR€241A1-j|£þ ` ç `€€@ÿRß›à@ àMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEó óÌÔ€/¼ÔÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€o/b/oà àà à)ÌJUANITA€WHITEHEAD,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà àà à)à àWayne€ChanceryÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€8006Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à01A01„9511„CH„00538Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌMATTIE€(WHITEHEAD)€THOMPSON,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellant.à àà àà à)ÌÌÌÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€FOR€WAYNE€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€Ô_ÔWAYNESBOROÔ_Ô,€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€JAMES€L.€Ô_ÔWEATHERFORDÔ_Ô,€CHANCELLORÌÌÌÌòòFor€Plaintiff/Appelleeóó:à àà àà àà àà àòòFor€Defendant/Appellantóó:ÌÌJohn€Knox€Ô_ÔWalkupÔ_Ôà àà àà àà àà àDavid€Ô_ÔKozlowskiÔ_ÔÌAttorney€General€and€Reporterà àà àà àà àColumbia,€Tennessee€ÌÌJames€H.€Tucker,€Jr.ÌAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌÌÔ€/„Ôò òÌÌÌÌà@ àREVERSED€AND€REMANDEDó óÌÔ€/¼ÔÌÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÇÑ Ü ÑÓ€ÓÔ€/„Ôò òòòà@ àO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óÌÌÔ€/¼Ôà àThis€appeal€involves€a€trial€courtððs€authority€to€enter€and€enforce€a€childÏsupport€award€when€proceedings€involving€the€child€were€already€pending€inÏanother€court.€€After€the€Wayne€County€Juvenile€Court€gave€custody€of€the€childÏto€the€State€in€a€dependent€and€neglect€proceeding,€the€Department€of€HumanÏServices€filed€separate€petitions€in€the€Chancery€Court€for€Wayne€County€seekingÏto€require€the€childððs€divorced€parents€to€pay€child€support.€€The€trial€courtÏdirected€both€parents€to€pay€child€support€to€the€State.€€After€the€Stateððs€repeatedÏefforts€over€five€years€to€require€the€mother€to€pay€child€support,€she€questionedÏthe€trial€courtððs€subject€matter€jurisdiction€because€the€dependent€and€neglectÏproceeding€was€still€pending€in€the€juvenile€court.€€The€trial€court€denied€theÏmotherððs€motion€to€dismiss,€and€on€this€appeal,€the€mother€renews€her€claim€thatÏthe€trial€court€should€have€deferred€to€the€juvenile€court.€€We€agree€and,Ïtherefore,€reverse€the€order€denying€the€motherððs€motion€to€dismiss.ÌÌà@ àò òI.€ó óÌÌà àMattie€Ella€Whitehead€Thompson€and€Jerry€Wayne€Whitehead€wereÏmarried€in€1979.€€Their€only€child,€a€daughter,€was€born€in€October€1981.€€InÏApril€1989,€the€Chancery€Court€for€Wayne€County€awarded€Ms.€Thompson€aÏdivorce,€granted€her€custody€of€her€daughter,€and€directed€Mr.€Whitehead€to€payÏchild€support.€Ms.€Thompson€later€remarried€for€the€fourth€time.ÌÌà àOn€October€2,€1990,€Buddy€R.€Smith,€Ms.€Thompsonððs€son€from€an€earlierÏmarriage,€and€his€wife€filed€a€petition€for€temporary€custody€in€the€JuvenileÏCourt€for€Wayne€County€alleging€that€Ms.€Thompson€was€endangering€his€half„sisterððs€welfare€by€not€providing€her€with€proper€care.× ƒ5 ××  ×€€Three€days€later,€theÏSmiths,€Ms.€Thompson,€and€Mr.€Whitehead€executed€and€filed€a€consent€order€inÏthe€juvenile€court€permitting€the€Smiths€to€take€temporary€custody€of€the€child.€ÏLess€than€one€year€later,€Ms.€Thompson€filed€her€own€petition€in€the€juvenileÏcourt€alleging€that€the€Smiths€were€neglecting€her€daughter.€€On€November€1,Ï1991,€the€juvenile€court€entered€an€order€finding€the€child€to€be€dependent€andÏneglected€and€placing€her€in€the€custody€of€the€Department€of€Human€Services.€ÏThe€child€has€been€in€foster€care€ever€since.ÌÌà àSoon€after€the€juvenile€court€placed€the€child€with€her€half„brother,€theÏDepartment€filed€separate€petitions€in€the€chancery€court€seeking€to€require€bothÏMs.€Thompson€and€Mr.€Whitehead€to€pay€child€support.× ƒ6 ××  ×€€On€November€8,€1990,Ïthe€chancery€court€entered€separate€orders€against€Ms.€Thompson€and€Mr.ÏWhitehead€directing€them€to€pay€the€Department€$25€per€week€in€child€support.€ÏOn€at€least€four€occasions€during€the€next€four€years,€the€Department€returned€toÏthe€chancery€court€seeking€orders€directing€Ms.€Thompson€to€continue€to€pay€herÏsupport€and€to€make€up€for€arrearages.€€On€each€occasion,€the€chancery€courtÏentered€an€order€resolving€the€issues€raised€by€the€petition.ÌÌà àOn€April€19,€1995,€Ms.€Thompson,€now€being€represented€by€an€attorneyÏwith€the€Legal€Services€of€South€Central€Tennessee,€moved€to€dismiss€the€pendingÏð ðchild€support€enforcement€matterðð€in€accordance€with€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€12.02(1)Ïand€12.08€on€the€grounds€that€the€chancery€court€did€not€have€jurisdiction€toÏaddress€support€matters€because€the€dependent€and€neglect€proceeding€was€stillÏpending€in€the€juvenile€court.€€On€June€12,€1995,€the€chancery€court€entered€anÏorder€denying€the€motion€on€the€ground€that€it€had€authority€to€order€Ms.ÏThompson€to€pay€child€support€ð ðeven€while€the€dependent/neglect€case€is€pendingÏin€the€Juvenile€Court€for€Wayne€County.ðð€€Ms.€Thompson€has€appealed€from€thisÏorder.ÌÌÌÌÌà@ àò òII.ó óÌÌà àThe€sole€question€before€us€on€this€appeal€is€whether€the€chancery€courtÏhas€authority€to€order€Ms.€Thompson€to€pay€child€support.€€While€undoubtedlyÏthe€chancery€court€has€subject€matter€jurisdiction€over€child€support€claims€inÏgeneral,€it€did€not€acquire€jurisdiction€in€this€case€because€the€juvenile€court,€aÏcourt€with€concurrent€jurisdiction,€had€already€acquired€jurisdiction€over€theÏcase.ÌÌà@ àò òA.€ó óÌÌà àThe€concept€of€jurisdiction€involves€a€courtððs€authority€to€adjudicate€aÏparticular€controversy.€€òòSee€Kane€v.€Kaneóó,€547€S.W.2d€559,€560€(Tenn.€1977).€ÍIn€order€to€acquire€jurisdiction,€a€court€must€have€jurisdiction€not€only€over€theÏparties€but€also€over€the€subject€matter€of€the€proceeding.€€The€concept€of€subjectÏmatter€jurisdiction€concerns€a€particular€courtððs€authority€to€hear€a€particularÏtype€of€case.€€òòSee€Ô_ÔMeighanÔ_Ô€v.€U.S.€Sprint€Comm.€Co.óó,€924€S.W.2d€632,€639Ï(Tenn.€1996);òò€Turpin€v.€Conner€Bros.€Excavating€Co.óó,€761€S.W.2d€296,€297Ï(Tenn.€1988).€€It€relates€to€the€nature€of€the€cause€of€action€and€the€relief€sought,Ïòòsee€Landers€v.€Jonesóó,€872€S.W.2d€674,€675€(Tenn.€1994),€and€can€only€beÏconferred€by€the€Constitution€of€Tennessee€or€by€statute.€€òòSee€Kane€v.€Kaneóó,€547ÏS.W.2d€at€560;€òòBrown€v.€Brownóó,€198€Tenn.€600,€618„19,€281€S.W.2d€492,€501Ï(1955).ÌÌà àWhen€more€than€one€court€has€been€given€jurisdiction€to€adjudicate€aÏparticular€type€of€controversy,€subject€matter€jurisdiction€may€also€be€influencedÏby€matters€of€comity€and€judicial€efficiency.€€Thus,€when€two€courts€haveÏconcurrent€subject€matter€jurisdiction,€the€first€court€to€acquire€jurisdiction€overÏa€particular€case€takes€exclusive€jurisdiction€to€end€the€matter.€€òòSee€AmericanÏLava€Corp.€v.€Ô_ÔSavenaÔ_Ôóó,€476€S.W.2d€639,€640€(Tenn.€1972);€òòRobinson€v.€Easteróó,Ï208€Tenn.€147,€149,€344€S.W.2d€365,€366€(1961);€òòWilson€v.€Ô_ÔGranthamÔ_Ôóó,€739ÏS.W.2d€776,€777€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1986).€€The€actions€of€a€court€that€attempts€toÏexercise€jurisdiction€over€a€case€after€another€court€with€concurrent€jurisdictionÏhas€already€exercised€jurisdiction€are€nullities.€€òòSee€State€v.€Hazzard,óó€743€S.W.2dÏ938,€941€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1987).ÌÌà àThese€principles€have€been€applied€to€situations€where€a€court€of€recordÏhas€attempted€to€act€after€a€juvenile€court€had€already€exercised€jurisdiction.€€TheÏTennessee€Supreme€Court€has€held€that€a€juvenile€court€that€finds€a€juvenile€to€beÏdependent€retains€jurisdiction€over€the€child€until€its€majority,€and€no€other€courtÍmay€issue€custody€or€any€other€type€of€order€regarding€the€child€without€theÏconsent€of€the€juvenile€court.€€òòSee€Ô_ÔKiddÔ_Ô€v.€State€ex.€rel.€Mooreóó,€207€Tenn.€244,Ï251„252,€338€S.W.2d€621,€624„25€(1960).€€Using€similar€reasoning,€this€courtÏhas€determined€that€a€court€of€record€did€not€have€jurisdiction€to€render€custodyÏorders€with€regard€to€children€that€were€already€the€subject€of€a€dependent€andÏneglect€proceeding€pending€in€the€juvenile€court€without€the€juvenile€courtððsÏconsent.€€òòSee€Arnold€v.€Gouvitsaóó,€735€S.W.2d€458,€461„62€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ï1987).€€We€perceive€no€reason€preventing€the€application€of€these€precedents€toÏchild€support€proceedings.ÌÌà@ àò òB.ó óÌÌà àBoth€the€chancery€court€and€the€juvenile€court€have€subject€matterÏjurisdiction€to€render€child€support€orders€in€the€proper€circumstances.€ÏChancery€courts€derive€their€authority€from€their€divorce€jurisdiction.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðððð€36„4„102(b),€36„5„101(a)(2)(A)€(1996€&€Supp.€1997).€€JuvenileÏcourts€derive€their€authority€from€their€jurisdiction€over€dependent€and€neglectÏproceedings.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€€37„1„104(d)(1),€„151(a)€(Supp.€1997).€ÏHowever,€a€juvenile€courtððs€authority€to€require€a€parent€to€pay€child€support€isÏlimited€to€circumstances€where€another€court€with€concurrent€jurisdiction€has€notÏpreviously€ordered€the€parent€to€pay€child€support.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„151(b)(2).ÌÌà àThe€outcome€of€this€appeal€hinges€on€the€answers€to€the€following€twoÏquestions:€did€the€juvenile€court€have€jurisdiction€to€order€Ms.€Thompson€to€payÏchild€support€as€the€result€of€the€filing€of€the€dependent€and€neglect€proceedingÏand,€if€the€juvenile€court€acquired€jurisdiction,€did€it€authorize€the€chancery€courtÍto€proceed€with€the€Departmentððs€petition€to€require€Ms.€Thompson€to€pay€childÏsupport?€€Under€the€facts€in€this€record,€we€find€that€the€juvenile€court€acquiredÏjurisdiction€to€enter€child€support€orders€and€that€it€has€not€authorized€theÏchancery€court€to€take€jurisdiction€over€the€Departmentððs€child€support€petitionÏwith€regard€to€Ms.€Thompson.ÌÌà àWhen€the€Smiths€filed€their€dependent€and€neglect€petition€in€OctoberÏ1990,€no€other€court€had€entered€an€order€directing€Ms.€Thompson€to€pay€childÏsupport.€€The€only€extant€order€was€the€chancery€courtððs€order€in€the€divorceÏproceeding€directing€Mr.€Whitehead€to€pay€child€support€to€Ms.€Thompson.€€ThatÏorder€did€not€involve€Ms.€Thompson,€and€the€facts€that€later€gave€rise€to€theÏSmithsðð€dependent€and€neglect€proceeding€were€not€at€issue€in€the€divorceÏproceeding.€€Thus,€once€the€juvenile€court€acquired€subject€matter€jurisdictionÏover€the€dependent€and€neglect€petition,€it€had€the€jurisdiction€and€duty€to€enterÏchild€support€orders€in€accordance€with€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„151(b)(2).ÌÌà àOnce€the€juvenile€court€acquired€jurisdiction€in€the€dependent€and€neglectÏproceeding,€it€retained€jurisdiction€over€all€related€matters€involving€the€childÏuntil€the€childððs€majority.€€Since€the€record€contains€no€indication€that€theÏjuvenile€court€authorized€the€chancery€court€to€entertain€the€DepartmentððsÏpetition€to€require€Ms.€Thompson€to€pay€child€support,€we€conclude€that€theÏchancery€court€should€not€have€entertained€this€petition.× ƒ7 ××  ×€€Because€the€chanceryÏcourt€did€not€have€subject€matter€jurisdiction€over€the€Departmentððs€request€forÍchild€support€from€Ms.€Thompson,€all€of€its€orders€with€regard€to€her€childÏsupport€are€void.ÌÌà àOur€determination€that€the€chancery€court€did€not€have€subject€matterÏjurisdiction€to€order€Ms.€Thompson€to€pay€child€support€does€not€necessarilyÏmean€that€Ms.€Thompson€is€entitled€to€recover€the€child€support€payments€she€hasÏalready€made.€€Parents€have€a€common„law€obligation€to€support€their€minorÏchildren.€€òòSee€Smith€v.€Goreóó,€728€S.W.2d€738,€750€(Tenn.€1987);€òòHall€v.€Jordanóó,Ï190€Tenn.€1,€11,€227€S.W.2d€35,€39€(1950).€€The€payments€that€Ms.€ThompsonÏhas€already€made€fulfill€this€common„law€obligation,€and€therefore,€she€is€notÏentitled€to€recover€them.€€However,€as€a€prospective€matter,€the€Department€mayÏno€longer€rely€on€the€chancery€courtððs€November€8,€1990€order€as€a€basis€toÏdemand€child€support€from€Ms.€Thompson.€€It€must€either€seek€an€award€forÏchild€support€from€the€juvenile€court€or€it€must€obtain€the€juvenile€courtððsÏauthorization€to€proceed€against€Ms.€Thompson€for€child€support€in€the€chanceryÏcourt.ÌÌà@ àò òIII.ó óÌÌà àWe€vacate€the€order€denying€Ms.€Thompsonððs€motion€to€dismiss€andÏremand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€for€further€proceedings€consistent€with€thisÏopinion.€€We€also€tax€the€costs€of€this€appeal€to€the€State€of€Tennessee.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà à______________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGE€ÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌBEN€H.€Ô_ÔCANTRELLÔ_Ô,€œJUDGE›