Facts: Father and Mother are divorced parents of two children. Their agreed parenting plan directed Father to pay monthly child support of $400 to Mother. The parenting plan further provided this obligation would continue until the children turned 21.

In 2017, Father petitioned to modify child support because he was earning a lower income due to an injury. He further alleged that the eldest child was a 24-year-old college graduate while the youngest child was still a minor. Father’s support obligation was reduced to $242 monthly.

In March 2020, the State petitioned to modify child support. The youngest child reached the age of majority the next month.

Following the hearing and via an order entered July 2, 2020, Father’s child-support obligation was increased to $441 monthly “beginning June 1, 2020.”

Over one year later, Father moved to set aside the July 2, 2020, order, arguing that the trial court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to modify child support because the youngest child had turned 18 and graduated high school by the time of the entry of the July 2, 2020, order.

By order entered December 9, 2021, the trial court determined it had jurisdiction to modify the child-support order and denied Father’s motion to set it aside.

Father appealed.

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

Tennessee law requires that decisions about child support be made within the confines of the Child Support Guidelines.

The Child Support Guidelines provide that a person who turns 18 while still in high school is a “child” for purposes of child support until the person graduates or their class graduates, whichever occurs last.

The Court found the trial court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to modify Father’s child support after the child became a legal adult:

On appeal, Father and the State agreed that the [trial] court had jurisdiction to modify child support until [the youngest child] reached the age of majority and graduated high school. It is also undisputed that [the youngest child] reached the age of majority and graduated high school both before the [trial] court entered the July 2, 2020, order modifying child support under the Guidelines and before the retroactive effective date of the modification, June 1, 2020.

The Court vacated the trial court’s July 2, 2020, and December 9, 2021, orders.

K.O.’s Comment: (1) Readers should note that Tennessee courts may extend child support until age 21 for children who are handicapped or disabled as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act and beyond age 21 for a “severely disabled” child if the obligor is financially able to continue paying support. However, nothing in this opinion suggests that either exception applies here.

(2) Sometimes, divorced parents agree to share their children’s college expenses. Such agreements are contractual obligations outside the scope of child support and are judged by the same rules of contract interpretation that apply to any other contract.

State ex rel. Hoard v. Barrom (Tennessee Court of Appeals, Western Section, December 2, 2022).

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