![[Masthead]](http://www.stategazette.com/images/nameplate.png)
RSS
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (1)
Alena Wharton and Robert Wharton were divorced in Crockett County in 2002. At the time, both were residents of Dyer County.
Since then, child custody and child support arrangements have been changed several times. In September 2005, the Crockett County chancellor approved a revised parenting plan that designated Robert Wharton as the primary residential parent and ordered Alena Wharton to pay child support. In February 2007, Robert Wharton asked the court to declare Alena Wharton in contempt of the child support court order.
Alena Wharton, who had moved to Kentucky by this time, asked in March 2007 that the case be transferred to Dyer County Chancery Court. Robert Wharton objected and the chancery court agreed. Alena Wharton appealed the decision.
The Tennessee Court of Appeals issued an opinion on Feb. 6 ordering that the divorce case be transferred to Dyer County Chancery Court. The appeals court determined that Alena Wharton's transfer request met the provisions of Tennessee state law.
"Under subsection (b), upon receipt of a request, the case must be transferred to the court of competent jurisdiction in the county where the child resides if neither the custodial nor non-custodial parent nor the child reside in the issuing county and if the child has resided in the transferee county for at least six months. It is undisputed that both conditions are met in this case," the appeals court stated in its opinion.
The appeals court said Alena Wharton did not waive her right to transfer the case when the divorce was heard and granted in 2002. "The trial court's reasoning, as we understand it, is that because Mother submitted to the jurisdiction of the Crockett County Chancery Court, waiving venue, when the divorce action was heard in 2002, waiving any objection based on venue in the divorce action, she has waived forever her right to request a transfer under the statute. We must again disagree," the opinion said.
"The plain language of section 36-5-3003 unambiguously provides for mandatory transfer upon request when the provisions of the remainder of the statute are met."
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please
exactly why is this news?? they should go to actual child support court on tuesdays and thursdays and see what goes on there. or should i say, what doesn't go on there!