There are several holdings of interest in the recent Heffington case:

1. In a post-divorce proceeding to modify a parenting plan, the trial court found Mother had “been inflexible in working with Father” regarding his parenting time and had done little to foster the children’s relationship with Father, all of which constituted a material change of circumstances that allowed the parenting plan to be revised.  The Court of Appeals affirmed.
2. The trial court erred by refusing to consider the preference of the parties’ 14-year old child, the trial court stating it did “not want to hear” the child’s testimony.  The Court of Appeals held this was clear error.
3. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to award attorney’s fees to Mother because both parties contributed to the prolonged discovery process.  Each party had to pay its own legal fees and expenses.

Heffington v. Heffington (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 19, 2010).