sum factors (Tennessee) · Go Syfert
← Tennessee issues

sum factors in Tennessee

47 Tennessee opinions name it 1 courts 2009–2026 22 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.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
In Re Marrgreen
tennctapp · 2005 · cited in 19 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2017–2026
2 sentences

2026The determination “‘does -5- not call for a rote examination of each of [the relevant] factors and then a determination of whether the sum of the factors tips in favor of or against the parent.’” Id. (quoting In re Marr, 194 S.W.3d 490, 499 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005)).

2026The determination “‘does not call for a rote examination of each of [the relevant] factors and then a determination of whether the sum of the factors tips in favor of or against the parent.’” Id. (quoting In re Marr, 194 S.W.3d 490, 499 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005)).

1819
In Re Audrey S.green
tennctapp · 2005 · cited in 19 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2009–2023
2 sentences

2023However, “[a]scertaining a child’s best interests does not call for a rote examination of each of Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113 (i)’s nine factors and then a determination of whether the sum of the factors tips in favor of or against the parent.” In re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d at 878 .

2022Making a determination as to a child’s best interest “does not call for a rote examination of each of Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113 (i)’s . . . factors and then a determination of whether the sum of the factors tips in favor of or against the parent.” In re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d at 878 .

619
White v. Moodygreen
tennctapp · 2004 · cited in 10 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2017–2026
2 sentences

2026Indeed, “[a]scertaining a child’s best interests . . . does not call for a rote examination of each [factor] . . . and then a determination of whether the sum of the factors tips in favor of or against the parent.” White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187, 194 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994).

2021As determined by the trial court, some of the factors indicate it is not in Manning’s best interest for Father’s parental rights to be terminated and others indicate it is; however, the best interest analysis does not consist of a rote examination of each factor followed by - 14 - “a determination of whether the sum of the factors tips in favor of or against the parent.” White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187, 194 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004).

610
Chaffin v. Ellisgreen
tennctapp · 2006 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021
1 sentence

2021Id.; see also -3- Chaffin, 211 S.W.3d at 286 . “‘[D]etermining a child’s best interest is a fact-sensitive inquiry,’” Grissom, 586 S.W.3d at 393 (quoting Solima v. Solima, No. M2014-01452- COA-R3-CV, 2015 WL 4594134 , at *4 (Tenn. Ct. App. July 30, 2015)), that “does not call for a rote examination of each of [the relevant] factors and then a determination of whether the sum of the factors tips in favor of or against the parent.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (1)

CaseCitedYears
In Re Bernard T. green
tenn · 2010
1 sentence

2020The best-interest analysis “is guided by a consideration of the factors listed in Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113 (i),” In re Bernard T., 319 S.W.3d at 606 , but not a rote examination of each factor followed by “a determination of whether the sum of the factors tips in favor of or against the parent.” White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187, 194 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004).

12020–2020

Statutes the citing opinions construe

TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113 (29) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-106 (19) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-102 (18) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-101 (16) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-101 (14) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-102 (12) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-103 (8) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 33-3-105 (5) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-2-403 (5) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-101 (4) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-405 (4) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-15-402 (4)

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.

Where else courts name it

TN 47 (2009–2026) NY 27 (1899–2026) CA 5 (1919–2015) NJ 2 (2005–2020) MO 2 (1986–1997) TX 2 (1961–2011)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check