CHRISTOPHER CONRAD FICHTEL v. JILL CROWELL FICHTEL - Articles

All Content


Posted by: Landry Butler on Apr 13, 2018

Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys 1:

Jeffrey L. Levy, Smyrna, Tennessee, for the appellant, Jill Crowell Fichtel.

Attorneys 2:

Elizabeth A. Garrett and Robert L. Jackson, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Christopher Conrad Fichtel.

Judge(s): GOLDIN

This is a post-divorce/parental relocation matter in which the father of two minor children opposed the mother’s intended relocation to Ohio. The father also sought a modification of the parties’ parenting plan regardless of whether the mother was permitted to relocate. The mother filed a cross-petition to modify the parenting plan and child support. After determining that the parties spent substantially equal intervals of time with the child, the court conducted a best-interest analysis to determine whether it was in the children’s best interest to relocate with the mother. The court concluded that it was not in the children’s best interest to relocate and modified child support to reflect the parties’ current incomes. Although the trial court made an explicit finding that the mother had indeed relocated without the children, the trial court never ruled on the parties’ competing claims to modify the original parenting plan or entered a new parenting plan. Having reviewed the record transmitted to us on appeal, we observe that the judgment appealed from is not final. Given the absence of a final judgment, we dismiss the appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Attachments: