The Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 8 provides that a pleading which sets forth a claim for relief, whether an original claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, shall contain the following: (1) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and (2) a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks. Relief in the alternative or of several different types may be demanded. In effect, this rule recognizes that the primary purpose of pleadings is to provide notice of the issues presented to the opposing party and to the court. Providing notice of the issues to be tried allows the opposing party to adequately prepare for trial.
In Stephanie Solima v. David Solima, the parties were divorced in July 2006, and Stephanie Solima (Mother) was designated the primary residential parent for their only child (a son). The final divorce decree contained a provision prohibiting Mother from consuming alcoholic beverages when the parties’ son was in her custody. This provision was later modified to prohibit both parents from drinking alcohol in excess in the presence of their child. At all relevant times, the parties were operating under a parenting plan adopted on April 8, 2013.
On July 9, 2013, Mother lost her job in Tennessee, and, on August 20, 2013, she found a job in Dallas. Mother subsequently filed a petition seeking permission to relocate and the entry of restraining orders against David Solima (Father). Father filed a response opposing Mother’s petition to relocate. Father also filed a separate petition to modify the parenting plan seeking, in part, to be designated as the primary residential parent. Mother filed a response opposing Father’s Petition to Modify.
After a hearing, the trial court did not name Father the primary residential parent but modified the schedule to increase Father’s parenting time. The trial court also modified child support by imputing additional income to Father after finding he was willfully underemployed.
Father appealed to The Court Of Appeals Of Tennessee At Nashville arguing that the trial court erred by imputing additional income to him based on a finding of willful underemployment due to the issue of his alleged willful underemployment not being raised in the pleadings. Mother did not allege that Father was voluntarily or willfully underemployed; therefore, Father argued, he was not put on notice the issue would be tried.
After oral arguments and reviewing the record, the Appellate Court concluded the following:
We agree with Mother that Father was on notice that child support would be modified if he were designated the primary residential parent or if the change in the days allocated to each parent under the parenting schedule created a significant variance in the amount of child support owed. In fact, Father submitted a proposed parenting plan that modified the child support section contained in the April 2013 parenting plan; however, that was based on a change in parenting time. The foregoing notwithstanding, notice that child support may be modified based on a change in the primary residential parent or parenting time does not, without more, put a party on notice that he or she is alleged to be underemployed and that the court may impute additional income to him or her when calculating or modifying child support.
Evidence that is relevant to modification of child support based on a change in the amount of parenting time may be very different from the evidence that is relevant to whether a party is voluntarily or willfully underemployed.
Based on these legal principles, we have concluded that Father was not on notice that the issue of voluntary underemployment would be tried. Therefore, the trial court erred by imputing income to Father for calculating his basic child support obligation. Nevertheless, because each party’s respective parenting time was modified by the trial court, it was incumbent on the court to determine whether that created a significant variance and, if so, to modify child support pursuant to the guidelines.
As such, the trial court’s modification of child support by imputing additional income to Father after finding he was willfully underemployed was reversed due to lack of notice as provided in The Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure.
If you were not given notice of an issue raised in a court pleading and as a result received an unfavorable ruling, you should seek the services of an experienced family law attorney. Contact Donna Wagner to schedule your consultation.
Real-life results
See what happy clients are saying about me.
“I spoke with several attorneys and from the moment I spoke with Donna I knew she was the person I wanted to hire for a child custody case.
From the very first interaction she was enthusiastic, friendly, and honest. She asked a lot of questions to get to know the case well. I was so impressed with how thorough and thoughtful she was throughout the entire process, explaining every step along the way.
Donna was great at staying in contact and kept me updated as everything progressed. She was affordable and very fair in her billing. If ever another situation is to arise in which I’m requiring legal assistance and representation she will be the first I call.
Due to Donna’s persistence I was able to come out ahead with more than I had ever hoped for when I first brought her my case. She helped me to see and understand things about my situation that would have never occurred to me on my own.
This woman has so much integrity! I’m so grateful for all of her help during a nerve wracking time. She was incredibly personable. I highly recommend Donna Wagner for your legal needs.
Best decision I ever made in the midst of a divorce, from someone who asked for the divorce, was to hire Donna Wagner. I was facing an attorney who was representing my spouse, thinking all I had to do was sign the papers. No, they were attempting to get money out of me. Keep in mind we didn’t have any kids. Anyhow, Donna came in and shut it all down. I was due in court in a week and she got that continued. After going back and forth with the opposing attorney, Donna was able to not only get them to settle the case without going to court but have everything ruled in my favor. I am finally divorced and can breathe easy. Thank you Donna Wagner!
Donna provided such expertise during my case with her. She was always responsive, knowledgeable and professional, while also being compassionate to my situation. I cannot recommend her enough!
I know for certain that If I am needing an attorney again in the future, I will be using Donna Wagner. There are so many great things to say about Donna. However, I believe what I appreciated most was how Donna handles special situations, and I assure you, my circumstances were just that! Donna was very thorough during my entire case. She was able to address my unique case but also do so with legal basis even though the courts may not always allow for such situations. Donna was very thorough each step of the way and was certain to not leave any stone un-turned. One thing I really liked about Donna was her fire. When situations arose, she can be more than passionate about her job and serving justice to those who deserve it. I also want Donna’s clients to know that she was very timely with me in her communications with me. Whether by email or phone, she was always just a call or a message away. When being in a legal situation, I know from previous experience, being able to reach your attorney means everything. I am more than pleased with the results that I recieved from Donna Wagner, and I assure you my case turned out better than I had imagined and even for a fair price. Donna Wagner rocks!
I know for certain that If I am needing an attorney again in the future, I will be using Donna Wagner. There are so many great things to say about Donna. However, I believe what I appreciated most was how Donna handles special situations, and I assure you, my circumstances were just that! Donna was very thorough during my entire case. She was able to address my unique case but also do so with legal basis even though the courts may not always allow for such situations. Donna was very thorough each step of the way and was certain to not leave any stone un-turned. One thing I really liked about Donna was her fire. When situations arose, she can be more than passionate about her job and serving justice to those who deserve it. I also want Donna’s clients to know that she was very timely with me in her communications with me. Whether by email or phone, she was always just a call or a message away. When being in a legal situation, I know from previous experience, being able to reach your attorney means everything. I am more than pleased with the results that I recieved from Donna Wagner, and I assure you my case turned out better than I had imagined and even for a fair price. Donna Wagner rocks!
I obtained Mrs. Donna Wagner’s services in 2012 to help with my charge of driving under the influence. I first called several other attorneys, but none of them were willing to listen to my case. Mrs. Wagner not only took the time to listen but went out of her way to be sensitive to my issues, respond quickly to my questions, and help me understand this unfamiliar process. It was clear to me from the beginning that she knew the system well and was very thorough in her exploration into my case. With her experience and knowledge of the Mt. Juiliet court system, combined with her adept use of the evidence at hand, she was able to get my charges significantly reduced. I could not be more happy with my choice of attorney. I am certain that I would not have had such a successful outcome without her guidance and skill.
