Brittany Lee-Ann Stanifer v. Derrick Tyler Stanifer

Jacksboro, Tennessee family law lawyers represented the parties in a parenting plan dispute.

Derrick T. Stanifer ("Father") and Brittany L. Stanifer, ("Mother") were divorced by order entered on May 10, 2018, which reserved the parenting issues for later disposition. The parties' first permanent parenting plan "(PPP)" was not entered until January 13, 2020. This plan was agreed to by the parties; however, the plan did not set child support or have a child support worksheet attached. As to child support, the plan stated:



All issues related to child support are currently being handled by the Child Support Magistrate, including calculation of Father's current support



2



obligation and the calculation of Father's arrearage. All issues related to child support shall remain with the Child Support Magistrate.



The child support issue was not further addressed in the plan and the accompanying order reiterated that child support would "remain under the control of the Magistrate."



After this, Father's parenting time was fully suspended due to domestic violence charges. This suspension was modified to allow supervised visitation on July 21, 2020. Supervised parenting time continued to be required for almost two years while the trial court and Father sparred over mental evaluations, which were a condition for reinstating Father's co-parenting time. Father then filed a "Motion for Modification of Father's Visitation and Emergency Custody" on March 8, 2023, wherein he sought emergency custody of the children. He alleged that "since the last court hearing on or about December 15, 2022, [M]other has possibly become homeless and involved in a divorce with Jeremy Allen Ristola alleging a history of domestic violence against the Mother and the Minor Children." He asked that the court restrict Mother to supervised parenting time only and order that she pay child support. However, he also sought reinstatement of "his co-parenting time per the agreement entered on January [13], 2020."[1]



On May 18, 2023, the court entered an order which awarded Father unsupervised parenting time for the first time since the 2020 suspension. Father's parenting time was set for every Saturday afternoon, and the order set a review hearing for June 22, 2023 "for consideration of further expansions to the [Father's] visitation." At the June hearing, the court expanded Father's visitation to include overnight and mid-week visits, but admonished Father regarding his text messages to Mother. The court then set the "final" review hearing for August 17, 2023. However, it appears from the record that the parties next appeared in court on October 26, 2023. An order from that hearing was entered on January 2, 2024. In that order, the trial court stated:





Derrick T. Stanifer ("Father") and Brittany L. Stanifer, ("Mother") were divorced by order entered on May 10, 2018, which reserved the parenting issues for later disposition. The parties' first permanent parenting plan "(PPP)" was not entered until January 13, 2020. This plan was agreed to by the parties; however, the plan did not set child support or have a child support worksheet attached. As to child support, the plan stated:







The parties were generally in agreement as to most issues; however, some dispute existed as to division of the Christmas holiday and Father's desire for additional overnight visitation during the week. After hearing brief argument of counsel and testimony, the Court resolved the issues not previously resolved by agreement and directed the parties to submit a parenting plan in accordance with their agreement and the directions of the Court.



The court then adopted a PPP which serves as the basis for this appeal. Like the parties' prior PPP, this plan did not include a child support worksheet or other disposition on child support, but instead stated that the issue was currently being handled by a child support magistrate.

Because this appeal was made from an order that was not final, this Court is without subject matter jurisdiction to hear this claim. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. Costs are taxed to the appellant, Derrick T. Stanifer, for which execution may issue if necessary.