Facts: Mother and Father, the divorced parents of Child, have a parenting plan that requires joint decision-making and requires Child’s uncovered medical expenses to be divided equally.

When Child developed significant emotional and psychological problems, Father placed her in several inpatient treatment programs. At the time, Mother told Father she could not afford to pay for them.

Father petitioned to have mother held in civil contempt for failing to pay her one-half portion of Child’s uncovered medical expenses.

While the trial court entered a judgment of $38,759.11 against Mother and in favor of Father for reimbursement for the uncovered medical expenses, it found her failure to pay was not willful because she “did not have the capacity to pay and she did what she could to recover money spent for [Child’s] care.” Mother was not in contempt of court.

Father appealed.

On Appeal: The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court.

To hold a party in contempt for failure to pay child support, a Tennessee court must also determine that the obligor had the ability to pay when the support was due. The burden of proof is on the obligor to show their inability to pay.

The ability to pay means the person must have the income or financial resources to pay the obligation when it is due. Spending money on other bills or obligations does not excuse failing to pay court-ordered child support. Having the means to meet other financial obligations shows an ability to pay child support.

Tennessee courts can only hold a person in contempt when the person is able to comply with the order at the time of the contempt hearing.

The Court agreed that Mother’s failure to pay one-half of the uncovered medical expenses was not willful because she lacked the ability to pay:

Mother testified that during 2014 and 2015 when the medical expenses were incurred, Mother was not employed and only received approximately $26,000 a year from rental income. The trial court found that Mother had informed Father that she could not pay for the inpatient treatment. . . . Additionally, the trial court found that Mother had been able to recover over $40,000 in proceeds for [] Child’s benefit from her insurance provider. Mother testified during trial that she had to file a grievance with the insurance company in order to obtain the proceeds. The trial court essentially found that Mother had done what she could to obtain this money for [] Child’s care. . . . With the trial court’s findings that Mother “did not have the capacity to pay and she did what she could to recover money spent for [Child’s] care,” the trial court denied Father’s petition for contempt. The evidence presented does not preponderate against the trial court’s finding that Mother’s failure to comply with the permanent parenting plan was not willful.

The trial court’s judgment declining to find Mother in contempt of court was affirmed.

Mossbeck v. Hoover (Tennessee Court of Appeals, Eastern Section, April 30, 2021).

If you found this helpful, please share it using the buttons below.