STATE OF TENNESSEE EX REL. WENDY HARRISON v. DANNY SCOTT - Articles

All Content


Posted by: Brittany Sims on May 30, 2013

Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys 1:

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter, Warren A. Jasper, Senior Counsel, and Randle W. Hill, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, State of Tennessee ex rel. Wendy Harrison.

Attorneys 2:

Cindy H. Morgan, Sparta, Tennessee, for the appellee, Danny Scott.

Judge(s): CLEMENT

This appeal arises from a post-divorce petition to modify the father’s child support obligation as set in 2000 under a previous version of the child support guidelines. The dispositive issue is whether there is a “Significant Variance” in the father’s income as required by Department of Human Services Rule 1240-2-4-.05(2)(b)(1) to allow a modification. The trial court found no significant variance in the father’s income; nevertheless, it modified his child support obligation, setting it at the presumptive amount as calculated under the current child support guidelines and using the parties’ current income. W e have determined the trial court’s finding of no significant variance was based upon a mathematical error, and we find there is a significant variance entitling the father to a modification of his child support obligation. Accordingly, we affirm the modification of the father’s support but on different grounds than those relied upon by the trial court.

Attachments: