Appeals Court Upholds Child Support Case Despite Mother’s Grievances

Tennessee case summary on child support and judge recusal in divorce and family law.

Appeals Court affirms child support case, despite Pro Se mother’s laundry list of grievances

Nedra R. Hastings v. Larry M. Hastings

The child in this child support case was born in 2004, and the State of Tennessee filed an action to establish child support. The litigation continued over the years. In 2020, a hearing was held before a Special Judge to hear Social Security Title IV D issues. The special judge dismissed the Title IV-D issues, and the rest of the case was heard before another judge. The mother appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals in 2020 after being dissatisfied by the outcome. This was her second appeal of four. The Court of Appeals ruled on the second appeal in April of 2024. The mother acted as an attorney in the appeal. Some of the arguments were not even supported by the mother. She argued, first, that the trial Judge, Nancy Percer Kessler, of the Shelby County Juvenile Court should have been recused. The mother argued, in particular, that the judge shouldn’t have made any decisions until the recusal request was decided. The appeals court, however, pointed out that the judge followed the correct procedure. She denied the recusal motion before hearing any other matters. The appeals court found that there was no reversible mistake on this point.

The mom also argued the Title IV-D questions were outside of the jurisdiction of the Court. But, the appeals court found that this argument was invalid because the case had already been brought to state court with the consent of the mother.The mom also argued the appointment of the special judge as improper. The chief judge issued an order that the regular court judge was absent and that an outside attorney was needed to act as a special judge. The appeals court, however, pointed out that it is not necessary for the court to prove the necessity of a special judge’s appointment. The mother also objected the use of Zoom during the COVID-19 Pandemic. The appeals court cited a Tennessee Supreme Court order that stated that the pandemic should be handled as efficiently as possible by other means than in-person hearings. The appeals court found that any error, if any, was harmless. The appeals court determined that any error was harmless. W2020-01225-COA-R3-JV (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. Legal citations omitted. Legal citations have been omitted.

For more information, visit Child Support Laws in Tennessee.