Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
26 Tennessee opinions name it 1 courts 2007–2025 15 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Cranston v. Combsgreen2 sentences2024Cranston v. Combs, 106 S.W.3d 641, 644 (Tenn. 2003). -7- 6-106(a) states that, “In . . . any [] proceeding requiring the court to make a custody determination regarding a minor child, the determination shall be made on the basis of the best interest of the child.” To that end, the statute goes on to provide a non-exclusive list of factors for the court to consider in addressing the child’s best interest. 2015Only if a material change in circumstance has occurred do we consider whether a change in primary residential parent is in the child‟s best interest by examining the statutory best interest factors.7 Cranston v. Combs, 106 S.W.3d 641, 644 (Tenn. 2003). | 7 | 7 |
In Re: Braxton M.green2 sentences2022See, e.g., In re Braxton M., 531 S.W.3d 708, 732 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). -5- We find the trial court’s application of Factor 2 troublesome when the statute itself directs consideration of the likelihood of each parent to adhere to court ordered parenting arrangements and any violation of a court order concerning those arrangements. 2022See, e.g., In re Braxton M., 531 S.W.3d 708, 732 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). -6- their lives. | 5 | 5 |
Andrew K. Armbrister v. Melissa H. Armbristergreen2 sentences2022Armbrister v. Armbrister, 414 S.W.3d 685, 697-98 (Tenn. 2013); see Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-106 (a). 2022Armbrister, 414 S.W.3d at 697-98 ; see Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-106 (a) (2021). | 2 | 4 |
Courtney P. Brunetz v. Neil A. Brunetzgreen2 sentences2025Brunetz v. Brunetz, 573 S.W.3d 173, 179 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018). 2024Brunetz, 573 S.W.3d at 179 ; Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-106 (a). | 1 | 4 |
In Re Gabriella D.green2 sentences2022In re Gabriella D., 531 S.W.3d at 681 . “‘[W]hen the best interests of the child and those of the adults are in conflict, such conflict shall always be resolved to favor the rights and the best interests of the child.’” Id. at 681-82 (quoting Tenn. Code Ann. § 4 “The Tennessee General Assembly recently amended the statutory best interest factors provided in Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-1-113(i).” In re Porcalyn N., No. E2020-01501-COA-R3-PT, 2021 WL 2026700 , at *12 n.6 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 21, 2021) (citing 2021 Tenn. Pub. 2022In re Gabriella D., 531 S.W.3d at 681 . “‘[W]hen the best interests of the child and those of the adults are in conflict, such conflict shall always be resolved to favor the rights and the best interests of the child.’” Id. at 681-82 (quoting Tenn. Code Ann. § 4 “The Tennessee General Assembly recently amended the statutory best interest factors provided in Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-1-113(i).” In re Porcalyn N., No. E2020-01501-COA-R3-PT, 2021 WL 2026700 , at *12 n.6 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 21, 2021) (citing 2021 Tenn. Pub. | 1 | 2 |
In Re MARgreen1 sentence2021See 2021 Tenn. - 35 - require a trial court to find the existence of each enumerated factor before it may conclude that terminating a parent’s rights is in the best interest of a child.” In re M.A.R., 183 S.W.3d 652, 667 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005) (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Earls v. Earlsgreen1 sentence2017Earls v. Earls, 42 S.W.3d 877, 885 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000); Turner v. Turner, 919 S.W.2d 340, 346 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995); Long v. Long, 488 S.W.2d 729, 733 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1972). 7 As discussed above, the juvenile court’s order only stated that it “ha[d] considered the factors in Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-101 [sic]” and that the factors weighed in favor of Mother. 8 Mother, on the other hand, uses the juvenile court’s scant factual findings and applies them over and over to each of the statutory best interest factors in an attempt to support the ruling of the juvenile court. 8 of the parents’ credib | 1 | 1 |
Turner v. Turnergreen1 sentence2017Earls v. Earls, 42 S.W.3d 877, 885 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000); Turner v. Turner, 919 S.W.2d 340, 346 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995); Long v. Long, 488 S.W.2d 729, 733 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1972). 7 As discussed above, the juvenile court’s order only stated that it “ha[d] considered the factors in Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-101 [sic]” and that the factors weighed in favor of Mother. 8 Mother, on the other hand, uses the juvenile court’s scant factual findings and applies them over and over to each of the statutory best interest factors in an attempt to support the ruling of the juvenile court. 8 of the parents’ credib | 1 | 1 |
Long v. Longgreen1 sentence2017Earls v. Earls, 42 S.W.3d 877, 885 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000); Turner v. Turner, 919 S.W.2d 340, 346 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995); Long v. Long, 488 S.W.2d 729, 733 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1972). 7 As discussed above, the juvenile court’s order only stated that it “ha[d] considered the factors in Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-101 [sic]” and that the factors weighed in favor of Mother. 8 Mother, on the other hand, uses the juvenile court’s scant factual findings and applies them over and over to each of the statutory best interest factors in an attempt to support the ruling of the juvenile court. 8 of the parents’ credib | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re: Kaliyah S.
green
1 sentence2024Id. -7- The Tennessee General Assembly amended the statutory best-interest factors in 2021. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Terri Ann Kelly v. Willard Reed Kelly
green
1 sentence2018In our view, the residential schedule ultimately established by the court does not “fall[ ] outside the spectrum of rulings that might reasonably result from an application of the correct legal standards to the evidence found in the record.” Kelly, 445 S.W.3d at 692 (quoting Armbrister, 414 S.W.3d at 693 )). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State Department of Children's Services v. A.M.H.
green
1 sentence2007In the intervening time from the first hearing in August, 2005 to this second hearing, this Court decided the case of State Dept. of Children’s Servs. v. A.M.H., 198 S.W.3d 757 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006), perm. app. denied, June 8, 2006. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.