Mom Punches Dad, Dad Gets 130 Days Parenting Time
Tennessee child custody case summary.
Madeline Lee Williams v. Joshua Dwain Williams
The husband and wife in this Bradley County, Tennessee, case were married for about five years before they separated in 2019. They were the parents of one child, who was born in 2018. The wife filed for divorce, and the husband’s answer also alleged inappropriate marital conduct.
Shortly after filing for divorce, the wife sought an order of protection, and the parties ultimately agreed to a mutual restraining order. While the cases were pending, the husband had supervised co-parenting time. Trial was held in 2020, which included the wife’s allegations that husband was in contempt for violating pretrial orders. The husband was found not guilty of contempt.
The trial court granted both parties a divorce. As to the allegations of domestic abuse, the trial court ruled that the husband had not committed these offenses. The trial court further held that the wife had punched the husband in the head three times.
The husband was granted 130 days per year of co-parenting time, based in part upon the wife’s punching the husband. Because there had been allegations that the husband had been drinking around the child, he was ordered to refrain from drinking “to excess” around the child. The husband was also required to maintain a Breathalyzer app on his phone, and was given requirements for using it before visitation.
As for the property division, the trial court found that various gifts received from the parties’ families had transmuted into marital property. Under the final division, the husband was awarded a greater portion of the proceeds of sale of the marital residence. After various posttrial motions, the wife appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
The appeals court first held that the lower court had correctly granted a divorce to both parties. It looked in particular at the husband’s allegation of being punched by the wife, and held that the lower court had properly credited the credibility of the husband’s testimony.
As for the parenting plan, the court reviewed the record carefully and concluded that the lower court had acted within its discretion. The wife argued that the lower court had “bent over backwards” to accommodate the best interests of the husband, but not those of the child. But after reviewing the evidence, the appeals court held that this was without merit. It carefully reviewed the statutory factors regarding the child’s best interests, and concluded that the lower court had acted properly in applying them.
The appeals court also reviewed the evidence concerning the property distribution, and held that the lower court had acted properly.
The Court of Appeals did make one modification of the lower court’s order, and that was to include a blanket prohibition against the husband’s consuming alcohol while parenting the child.
The appeals court denied the husband’s request for attorney fees on appeal, but taxed the costs of the appeal against the wife.
No. E2021-00432-COA-R3-JV (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 7, 2022).
To learn more, see Child Custody Laws in Tennessee and our video, How is child custody determined in Tennessee?
See also Tennessee Parenting Plans and Child Support Worksheets: Building a Constructive Future for Your Family featuring examples of parenting plans and child support worksheets from real cases available on Amazon.com.
