Facts: Mother and Father are the divorced parents of three children. Years after their divorce, Father petitioned to reduce his child support. Both parties represented themselves.

The trial court reviewed exhibits showing proof of the parties’ work history, expenses, Social Security benefits, and Father’s federal income tax returns.

After hearing the proof, the trial court:

• removed the parties’ two older children from the child support calculation because they have become emancipated,
• imputed the statutory amount of $35,936 to Mother because of her education and her admission that she was voluntarily underemployed,
• imputed $200,000 to Father after finding him voluntarily underemployed, and
• reduced Father’s parenting time on the child-support worksheet from 109 days to 83 days because Father had not exercised his Sunday evening parenting time for several years.

Because of these findings, Father’s child-support obligation increased from $1257 to $1529 per month.

Father appealed.

On Appeal: The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s modification of child support.

Reduction in parenting time. Father argued that because Mother never petitioned to change the parenting plan or seek a reduction in Father’s parenting time, the trial court erred by reducing his time from 109 days to 83 days.

The Court found no error in the trial court’s change in parenting time on the child-support worksheet:

The trial court repeatedly referred to the child support worksheet and did not mention any change to the [Parenting Plan]. In addition, the trial court expressly stated during the hearing that it could not modify the [Parenting Plan] because neither party had filed a petition to modify coparenting time….

Nothing in the trial court’s order modified the number of coparenting days each parent could enjoy with the children as had been set forth in the original [Parenting Plan]. Rather, the trial court properly adjusted the child support worksheet to reflect the actual number of days the children spent with each parent for the sole purpose of calculating the adjusted child support award. Because the [Parenting Plan] was not modified, Father’s issue on this point is pretermitted as moot.

Attorney’s fees on appeal. In his appeal, Father claimed he could not find a Tennessee attorney “in time” to submit his briefs, so he hired an out-of-state appellate attorney who prepared his briefs for filing. That attorney did not enter an appearance before the Court.

In Tennessee, self-represented litigants may not recover attorney’s fees.

The Court denied Father’s request for attorney’s fees on appeal:

Concerning Father’s revelation that an “out-of-state appellate attorney” has assisted him with the filings in this appeal, we note that no attorney has filed a notice of appearance before this Court on Father’s behalf and there are no attorney signatures reflected on Father’s briefs or any of the motions Father has filed in this appeal. This type of “limited scope representation” by an attorney has been recently addressed by the Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee, [which requires the attorney to disclose the limited scope representation to the tribunal].

Therefore, if Father did receive assistance from an attorney, such attorney has not complied with [the rules of civil procedure] because no attorney has filed with this Court any disclosure of his or her identity or provided a notice of limited scope representation as required by the rule. In addition, Father has disclosed that the attorney is an “out-of-state appellate attorney.” Because the attorney has not disclosed his or her identity or whether he or she is licensed to practice law in the state, we cannot ascertain whether the attorney could properly appear before this Court.

The Court affirmed the trial court’s modification of Father’s child support and denied Father’s request for attorney’s fees on appeal.

Source: Cox v. Cox (Tennessee Court of Appeals, Middle Section, May 28, 2025).

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