Facts: Father and Mother are the parents of Child. Shortly before Father filed for divorce, Mother moved to Ohio and initially took Child with her. Father retrieved Child and cared for her in Tennessee while the divorce was pending. Both parents sought to be Child’s primary residential parent.

During a three-day trial, significant evidence centered on Father’s romantic relationships. Father and his former girlfriend testified about a sexual relationship, which Father claimed did not start until after the parties separated.

Mother proposed that Child live with her in Ohio during the school year, whereas Father’s proposed parenting plan named him the primary residential parent in Tennessee.

The Trial Court granted Mother a divorce based on Father’s inappropriate marital conduct and designated her as the primary residential parent. The judge expressed concern about Father’s credibility, noting that Father lied under oath about the timing of his affair. The Trial Court found that Father had been evasive in his testimony and resolved credibility issues against him.

Focusing on stability for Child, the Trial Court concluded that Mother could provide a more stable home. Child was to move to Ohio to live mainly with Mother. Mother was awarded 245 days of parenting time in Ohio, and Father received 120 days, mostly during summer and school breaks.

Father appealed, arguing the Trial Court failed to make proper findings and gave undue weight to his marital misconduct.

On Appeal: The Court of Appeals vacated the Trial Court’s custody determination and remanded the case for proper findings on the Child’s best interests.

Tennessee law requires trial courts to make specific findings of fact and conclusions of law in custody cases. In any case involving a child’s custody, the decision must be based on the best interest of the child, taking into account the factors outlined in TCA § 36-6-106. Trial courts are required to consider all relevant best-interest factors and explain how those factors influence their decisions.

Tennessee courts have consistently held that a parent’s “marital fault” (such as adultery or other misconduct leading to the divorce) is not relevant to custody decisions except to the extent that the conduct impacts the parent’s ability to care for the child or the child’s well-being. In other words, custody is not a reward for the faultless spouse or a punishment for the misbehaving one; it’s based on the child’s best interest.

Because the Trial Court in this case appeared to base its custody decision mainly on Father’s affair without connecting that behavior to the Child’s best interest, the Court of Appeals vacated the custody award and remanded the issue for a proper best-interest analysis by the Trial Court:

In light of its sparse findings of fact, the Trial Court appeared to give outsized weight to [Father]’s affair, which is relevant as to custody only to the extent it affects the Child’s best interest. “[T]he fault a parent bears for the breakup of the marriage is not relevant for the purposes of a custody determination, except insofar as that parent’s conduct bears on his or her fitness for parental responsibilities.”

*     *     *     *     *

[T]he Trial Court in this case made no finding as to whether Father’s affair or his lack of candidness about it affected the Child’s best interest.

The Trial Court, therefore, erred by failing to provide sufficient findings of fact and conclusions of law and focusing on Father’s affair without specific findings about how that would impact the Child’s best interest and Father’s ability to parent the Child.

Without a clear explanation of how Father’s infidelity or other behavior actually impacted the Child, the appellate court could not uphold the custody decision. On remand, the Trial Court must specifically address each applicable best-interest factor in § 36-6-106 and explain its reasoning.

K.O.’s Comment: It bears repeating that marital fault generally should not dictate custody outcomes in Tennessee. Judges may be understandably displeased when a parent’s affair breaks up a marriage, but custody decisions aren’t meant to mete out moral judgment or punishment. Tennessee law makes it clear that a parent’s infidelity alone isn’t a valid reason to change custody or limit parenting time unless their behavior clearly affects the child’s well-being.

A parent can be a poor spouse yet still be a caring and capable parent. I’ve seen situations where a spouse’s cheating had no impact on the kids. In those cases, courts rightly focus on parenting skills and the child’s needs, not the parent’s love life. Conversely, if an affair harms the child, such as exposing them to inappropriate situations or revealing serious lapses in parental judgment, that becomes relevant. The key for lawyers is to link the misconduct to parenting. If you’re trying to use an affair against the other parent in a custody dispute, you need to demonstrate how it genuinely affects the child. Otherwise, Tennessee courts won’t punish a parent by limiting custody just for adultery.

Source: Reese v. Reese (Tennessee Court of Appeals, Eastern Section, December 11, 2025).

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