Suttles v. Suttles
| Decision Date | 11 April 1988 |
| Citation | 748 S.W.2d 427 |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
| Parties | Nancy Ann Barnes SUTTLES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dennis Wade SUTTLES, Defendant-Appellee. 748 S.W.2d 427 |
Robert L. Ogle, Jr., Ogle & Wade, Sevierville, for plaintiff-appellant.
Charles S. Sexton, Sexton & Wallace, Sevierville, for defendant-appellee.
The issue in this domestic relations case is whether Dennis W. Suttles, Defendant, who is presently serving a thirty (30) year prison term, may be denied visitation with his son. Plaintiff, Nancy B. Suttles, is the mother of the only child of the marriage of these parties and was awarded sole custody of the child by the trial court in this divorce.
The parties were married on July 5, 1974. On May 6, 1985, they separated and the following day, Plaintiff filed this action for divorce in the Sevier County Chancery Court on grounds of cruel and inhuman treatment, alleging that Defendant had a history of physically abusing her and, specifically, that on May 4, 1985, Defendant beat her while she held their son in her arms. Shortly after filing this Complaint, an Order of Reconciliation was entered on May 25, 1985. Several months later, however, on September 17, 1985, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Set Aside Order of Reconciliation as well as an Amendment to the Complaint. She alleged that Defendant had continued to abuse her and they had separated a second time on September 14, 1985. On September 15, 1985, Defendant came to see Plaintiff where she was staying at a campground in Pigeon Forge and when Plaintiff's father intervened in an argument between the parties, Defendant drew a pistol and shot her father in the chest. He then abducted Plaintiff and their son in his car and led the police on a high speed chase. During the course of the chase, Defendant threatened his son with the pistol and shot at Plaintiff when she tried to protect the child. As a result of the chase, the Defendant wrecked his car, injuring both Plaintiff and their son. At some point during this incident, Defendant choked his son but was restrained by Plaintiff and the police before the child was seriously injured. Criminal charges resulted from these events.
In his Answer, filed October 22, 1985, Defendant denied the allegations of cruel and inhuman treatment but waived contesting the grounds for divorce. He admitted that he is presently incarcerated but denied ever having beaten Plaintiff, although he conceded that they had had physical confrontations in the past. He specifically reserved admitting or denying the allegations of criminal acts in the Amended Complaint due to pending criminal proceedings. A general denial was, however, pled. Nevertheless, the record contains both the indictments and the judgments entered in the criminal proceedings. Four counts were brought against Defendant, each enhanced by the use of a firearm. 1 On December 2, 1985, Defendant voluntarily pled guilty to each count. On January 1, 1986, judgments were entered in the criminal case on the four counts of assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree with a firearm, for which he received concurrent and consecutive sentences totaling 35 years. 2
The trial court entered its judgment of divorce on March 5, 1986, granting Plaintiff an absolute divorce on grounds of cruel and inhuman treatment. Other issues were reserved for a hearing on the following day. On March 6, 1986, after a hearing in which Defendant asked to be allowed visitation rights, the trial court ordered that the child, then 5 years old, 3 be made available for reasonable visitation on whatever basis the Department of Correction would allow. A Petition to Rehear on behalf of Plaintiff was denied by the trial court on March 7, 1986, and the Notice of Appeal was filed on April 2, 1986. The Western Section of the Court of Appeals, sitting at Knoxville, affirmed the judgment of the trial court but modified the order of visitation to require at least monthly visitation. The Plaintiff then filed a timely Application for Permission to Appeal.
We granted Permission to Appeal to determine whether, in these circumstances, denial or suspension of visitation would be appropriate. Although we recognize that the general rule is that "the details of custody and visitation with children are peculiarly within the broad discretion of the trial judge," Edwards v. Edwards, 501 S.W.2d 283, 291 (Tenn.App.1973), and that the trial court's decision will not ordinarily be reversed absent some abuse of that discretion, "in reviewing child custody and visitation cases, we must remember that the welfare of the child has always been the paramount consideration" for the courts. Luke v. Luke, 651 S.W.2d 219, 221 (Tenn.1983). In addition, the right of the noncustodial parent to reasonable visitation is clearly favored. E.g., Weaver v. Weaver, 37 Tenn.App. 195, 202-203, 261 S.W.2d 145, 148 (1953). Nevertheless, "the right of visitation ... may be limited, or eliminated, if there is definite...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Cohen v. Cohen
-
Johnson v Johnson
...marital conduct; . . . [T]hat considering the cases of Gaskill v. Gaskill, 936 S.W.2d 626, 634 (Tenn.App. 1996) and Suttles vs. Suttles, 748 S.W.2d 427 (Tenn. 1988) in making its decision regarding custody and visitation as well as the statutory factors, demeanor and credibility of the part......
-
Wix v Wix
...that non-custodial parents have a fundamental right to visit their children. Tenn. Code Ann. 36-6-301 (Supp. 2000); Suttles v. Suttles, 748 S.W.2d 427, 429 (Tenn. 1988); Helson v. Cyrus, 989 S.W.2d 704, 707 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998); Jahn v. Jahn, 932 S.W.2d 939, 941 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996); Weav......
-
Dishon v. Dishon
...trial courts are vested with wide discretion in matters of child custody. Eldridge v. Eldridge, 42 S.W.3d at 85; Suttles v. Suttles, 748 S.W.2d 427, 429 (Tenn. 1988). A determination of custody and visitation often hinges on subtle factors such as the parents' demeanor and credibility durin......
-
Do no harm: an analysis of the legal and social consequences of child visitation determinations for incarcerated perpetrators of extreme acts of violence against women.
...McNeeley v. McNeeley, 45 S.W.3d 876 (Ky. Ct. App. 2001); Rogowski v. Rogowski, 251 A.D.2d 827 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998); Suttles v. Suttles, 748 S.W.2d 427, 428 (Tenn. 1988) (reversing both the trial and appellate courts, which had granted visitation to incarcerated father): Koop v. Koop, 378 N......