Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404 (2024)
Permanent parenting plan
✓ Justia copy: laws through about 2024 (2025 and 2026 sessions missing)
- (a) Any final decree or decree of modification in an action for absolute divorce, legal separation, annulment, or separate maintenance involving a minor child shall incorporate a permanent parenting plan; provided, however, that this part shall be inapplicable to parties who were divorced prior to July 1, 1997, and thereafter return to court to enter an agreed order modifying terms of the previous court order. A permanent parenting plan shall:
- (1) Provide for the child's changing needs as the child grows and matures, in a way that minimizes the need for further modifications to the permanent parenting plan;
- (2) Establish the authority and responsibilities of each parent with respect to the child, consistent with the criteria in this part;
- (3) Minimize the child's exposure to harmful parental conflict;
- (4) Provide for a process for dispute resolution, before court action, unless precluded or limited by § 36-6-406; provided, that state agency cases are excluded from the requirement of dispute resolution as to any child support issue involved. In the process for dispute resolution:
- (A) Preference shall be given to carrying out the parenting plan;
- (B) The parents shall use the designated process to resolve disputes relating to the implementation of the plan;
- (C) A written record shall be prepared of any agreement reached in mediation, arbitration, or settlement conference and shall be provided to each party to be drafted into a consent order of modification;
- (D) If the court finds that a parent willfully failed to appear at a scheduled dispute resolution process without good reason, the court may, upon motion, award attorney fees and financial sanctions to the prevailing parent;
- (E) This subsection (a) shall be set forth in the decree; and
- (F) Nothing in this part shall preclude court action, if required to protect the welfare of the child or a party;
- (5) Allocate decision-making authority to one (1) or both parties regarding the child's education, health care, extracurricular activities, and religious upbringing. The parties may incorporate an agreement related to the care and growth of the child in these specified areas, or in other areas, into their plan, consistent with the criteria in this part. Regardless of the allocation of decision making in the parenting plan, the parties may agree that either parent may make emergency decisions affecting the health or safety of the child;
- (6) Provide that each parent may make the day-to-day decisions regarding the care of the child while the child is residing with that parent;
- (7) Provide that when mutual decision making is designated but cannot be achieved, the parties shall make a good-faith effort to resolve the issue through the appropriate dispute resolution process, subject to the exception set forth in subdivision (a)(4)(F);
- (8) Require the obligor to report annually on a date certain to the obligee, and the department of human services or its contractor in Title IV-D cases, on a form provided by the court, the obligor's income as defined by the child support guidelines and related provisions contained in chapter 5 of this title; and
- (9) Specify that if the driver license of a parent is currently expired, canceled, suspended or revoked or if the parent does not possess a valid driver license for any other reason, the parent shall make acceptable transportation arrangements as may be necessary to protect and ensure the health, safety and welfare of the child when such child is in the custody of such parent.
- (b) Any permanent parenting plan shall include a residential schedule as defined in § 36-6-402. The court shall make residential provisions for each child, consistent with the child's developmental level and the family's social and economic circumstances, which encourage each parent to maintain a loving, stable, and nurturing relationship with the child. The child's residential schedule shall be consistent with this part. If the limitations of § 36-6-406 are not dispositive of the child's residential schedule, the court shall consider the factors found in § 36-6-106(a)(1)-(15).
- (c) The court shall approve a permanent parenting plan as follows:
- (1) Upon agreement of the parties:
- (A) With the entry of a final decree or judgment; or
- (B) With a consent order to modify a final decree or judgment involving a minor child;
- (2) If the parties cannot reach agreement on a permanent parenting plan, upon the motion of either party, or upon its own motion, the court may order appropriate dispute resolution proceedings pursuant to Tennessee Rules of the Supreme Court, Rule 31, to determine a permanent parenting plan; or
- (3) If the parties have not reached agreement on a permanent parenting plan on or before forty-five (45) days before the date set for trial, each party shall file and serve a proposed permanent parenting plan, even though the parties may continue to mediate or negotiate. Failure to comply by a party may result in the court's adoption of the plan filed by the opposing party if the court finds such plan to be in the best interests of the child. In determining whether the proposed plan is in the best interests of the child, the court may consider the allocation of residential time and support obligations contained in the child support guidelines and related provisions contained in chapter 5 of this title. Each parent submitting a proposed permanent parenting plan shall attach a verified statement of income pursuant to the child support guidelines and related provisions contained in chapter 5 of this title, and a verified statement that the plan is proposed in good faith and is in the best interest of the child.
- (1) Upon agreement of the parties:
- (d) The administrative office of the courts shall develop a "parenting plan" form that shall be used consistently by each court within the state that approves parenting plans pursuant to § 36-6-403 or this section on and after July 1, 2005. The administrative office of the courts shall be responsible for distributing such form for the use of those courts no later than June 1, 2005. The administrative office of the courts shall be responsible for updating such form as it deems necessary, in consultation with the Tennessee family law commission, the domestic relations committee of the Tennessee judicial conference, and other knowledgeable persons.
Amended by 2014 Tenn. Acts, ch. 617, s 7, eff. 7/1/2014.
Acts 1997 , ch. 557, § 1; T.C.A., § 36-6-410; Acts 2000, ch. 889, § 1; 2002, ch. 677, § 1; 2003 , ch. 243, § 1; 2004, ch. 864, § 1; 2005, ch. 127, § 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 256
cases (37 in the last 5 years), 1997–2026 · leading case: Andrew K. Armbrister v. Melissa H. Armbrister, 414 S.W.3d 685 (Tenn. 2013).
Andrew K. Armbrister v. Melissa H. Armbrister, 414 S.W.3d 685 (Tenn. 2013). “§ 36-6-404(a). A “ ‘[p]ermanent parenting plan’ means a written plan for the parenting and best interests of the child, including the allocation of parenting responsibilities and the establishment of a residential schedule, as well as an award of child support consistent with…”
In Re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “§ 36-6-307 (2001) (grandparent visitation); Tenn.Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b) (Supp.2004) (parenting plans).”
Hopkins v. Hopkins, 152 S.W.3d 447 (Tenn. 2004). “[4] Finally, the trial court should direct the parties to submit to the court a permanent parenting plan that incorporates the requirements set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-6-404. Conclusion In summary, we hold that under the Child Support Guidelines, only the…”
Burden v. Burden, 250 S.W.3d 899 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “The *909 actual list of factors is found in Part 4, or § 36-6-404. Although the court in Hopkins cites to Part 1 of the section, or § 36-6-401, it is clearly referring to the same sixteen factors cited repeatedly herein, i.”
In Re Marr, 194 S.W.3d 490 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “§ 36-6-307 (2005) (grandparent visitation); Tenn.Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b) (2005) (parenting plans).”
White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). “§ 36-6-307 (2001) (grandparent visitation); Tenn.Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b) (Supp.2004) (parenting plans).”
Courtney P. Brunetz v. Neil A. Brunetz, 573 S.W.3d 173 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018). “§ 36-6-404 (b). Armbrister v. Armbrister, 414 S.”
Travis Daniel Freeman v. Wendy Y. Freeman, 579 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018). “In so holding, we stressed the mandatory language of Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404 (a), which provides: [a]ny final decree or decree of modification in an action for -5- absolute divorce, legal separation, annulment, or separate maintenance involving a minor child shall incorporate…”
Angelia Lynette Maupin v. Paul Wayne Maupin, 420 S.W.3d 761 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2013). “Mother asserts she should have been designated as the primary residential parent based on the relevant factors in Tenn.Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b) (2010). She places particular emphasis on Father’s refusal or inability to encourage the boys to have a relationship with Mother.”
Dana Jo Stricklin v. Jerone Trent Stricklin, 490 S.W.3d 8 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2015). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 36-6-404(c) (2014). Our opinion on this issue, however, should not be construed as negating the importance of proving a material change of circumstance in contested cases.”
Shofner v. Shofner, 181 S.W.3d 703 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “§ 36-6-106(a) (2001); Tenn.Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b) (Supp. 2004); Tenn.”
Curtis v. Hill, 215 S.W.3d 836 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006). “It further appeared to the Court having heard the testimony of both parties and the children that a material change of circumstances has occurred and after conducting a comparative fitness analysis in accordance with T.C.A. § 36-6-404, the Court finds that it would be in the…”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(3): 1 case
Brianna Danielle King v. Aaron Jefferson Daily, No. M2017-01743-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 30, 2018).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(3)(d): 1 case
Victoria Leanne Potts v. Timothy S. Potts, No. E2016-02283-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 8, 2018).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(4): 1 case
Robert Trey Wood, III v. Jennifer Rose Wood, No. W2012-01250-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. May 16, 2013).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(5): 1 case
Brianna Danielle King v. Aaron Jefferson Daily, No. M2017-01743-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 30, 2018).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(a): 20 cases
Andrew K. Armbrister v. Melissa H. Armbrister, 414 S.W.3d 685 (Tenn. 2013). “§ 36-6-404(a). A “ ‘[p]ermanent parenting plan’ means a written plan for the parenting and best interests of the child, including the allocation of parenting responsibilities and the establishment of a residential schedule, as well as an award of child support consistent with…”
Gray v. Gray, 78 S.W.3d 881 (Tenn. 2002).
Victoria Leanne Potts v. Timothy S. Potts, No. E2016-02283-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 8, 2018).
Robin Leah Louise Farnham Carter v. Myron Thomas Carter, No. E2017-01648-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 7, 2018).
Tyler Cole Deaton v. Katlyn Nicole Williams, No. W2018-00564-COA-R3-JV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 21, 2020).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(a)(2): 1 case
Courtney P. Brunetz v. Neil A. Brunetz, 573 S.W.3d 173 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018). “§ 36-6-404 (b). Armbrister v. Armbrister, 414 S.”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(a)(3): 1 case
Courtney P. Brunetz v. Neil A. Brunetz, 573 S.W.3d 173 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018). “§ 36-6-404 (b). Armbrister v. Armbrister, 414 S.”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(a)(3)(2010): 1 case
Robert Lee Melvin v. Wendy Ann Melvin, 415 S.W.3d 847 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2011).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(a)(4): 3 cases
David Bryan Hawk v. Crystal Goan Hawk, No. E2015-01333-COA-R3-CV, 2016 WL 901518 (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 9, 2016).
In re Grace N., No. M2014-00803-COA-R3-JV, 2015 WL 2358630 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 14, 2015).
Rennee N. Dhillon v. Gursheel S. Dhillon, No. M2012-00194-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. July 31, 2013).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(a)(4)(F): 2 cases
Michael J. Hogan v. Janet Katherine Hogan, No. W2008-01750-COA-R3-CV, 2009 WL 2632755 (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 27, 2009).
Amy C. Blackwell Wiseman v. William S. Wiseman, II, No. M2010-01642-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 28, 2011).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(a)(5): 2 cases
Edna Gergel v. James Gergel, No. E2020-01534-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 1222945 (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 26, 2022).
Yonas M. Teshale v. Fanchaisavanh Lanexang, No. M2024-00815-COA-R3-JV (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 6, 2026).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b): 81 cases
Andrew K. Armbrister v. Melissa H. Armbrister, 414 S.W.3d 685 (Tenn. 2013). “§ 36-6-404(a). A “ ‘[p]ermanent parenting plan’ means a written plan for the parenting and best interests of the child, including the allocation of parenting responsibilities and the establishment of a residential schedule, as well as an award of child support consistent with…”
In Re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “§ 36-6-307 (2001) (grandparent visitation); Tenn.Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b) (Supp.2004) (parenting plans).”
In Re Marr, 194 S.W.3d 490 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “§ 36-6-307 (2005) (grandparent visitation); Tenn.Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b) (2005) (parenting plans).”
White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). “§ 36-6-307 (2001) (grandparent visitation); Tenn.Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b) (Supp.2004) (parenting plans).”
Hopkins v. Hopkins, 152 S.W.3d 447 (Tenn. 2004). “[4] Finally, the trial court should direct the parties to submit to the court a permanent parenting plan that incorporates the requirements set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-6-404. Conclusion In summary, we hold that under the Child Support Guidelines, only the…”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b)(1): 2 cases
Andrew K. Armbrister v. Melissa H. Armbrister, 414 S.W.3d 685 (Tenn. 2013). “§ 36-6-404(a). A “ ‘[p]ermanent parenting plan’ means a written plan for the parenting and best interests of the child, including the allocation of parenting responsibilities and the establishment of a residential schedule, as well as an award of child support consistent with…”
Kirby Miranda Gentry v. Michael Anthony Gentry, No. E2013-01038-COA-R9-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. May 28, 2014).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b)(12): 1 case
Lindsi Allison Connors v. Jeremy Phillip Lawson, No. E2011-00757-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. May 16, 2012).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b)(14): 1 case
Martha Elaine Weaver Carter v. David Ray Carter, No. M2013-00193-COA-R3-CV, 2013 WL 5568360 (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 7, 2013).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b)(15): 1 case
K.B.J. v. T.J., No. E2010-01157-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 26, 2011).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b)(2): 2 cases
Burden v. Burden, 250 S.W.3d 899 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “The *909 actual list of factors is found in Part 4, or § 36-6-404. Although the court in Hopkins cites to Part 1 of the section, or § 36-6-401, it is clearly referring to the same sixteen factors cited repeatedly herein, i.”
Tera Danielle Ward v. John Patrick Ward, No. M2012-01184-COA-R3-CV, 2013 WL 3198157 (Tenn. Ct. App. June 20, 2013).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b)(3): 1 case
Tera Danielle Ward v. John Patrick Ward, No. M2012-01184-COA-R3-CV, 2013 WL 3198157 (Tenn. Ct. App. June 20, 2013).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b)(5): 2 cases
Susan Elaine Dobbs v. Brooke Anthony Dobbs, No. M2011-01523-COA-R3-CV, 2012 WL 3201938 (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 7, 2012).
Christopher Grey Cummings v. Pepper Lynne Werner Cummings, No. M2003-00086-COA-R3-CV, 2004 WL 2346000 (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 15, 2004).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b)(6): 1 case
Tera Danielle Ward v. John Patrick Ward, No. M2012-01184-COA-R3-CV, 2013 WL 3198157 (Tenn. Ct. App. June 20, 2013).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b)(7): 1 case
Burden v. Burden, 250 S.W.3d 899 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “The *909 actual list of factors is found in Part 4, or § 36-6-404. Although the court in Hopkins cites to Part 1 of the section, or § 36-6-401, it is clearly referring to the same sixteen factors cited repeatedly herein, i.”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b)(9): 1 case
Burden v. Burden, 250 S.W.3d 899 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “The *909 actual list of factors is found in Part 4, or § 36-6-404. Although the court in Hopkins cites to Part 1 of the section, or § 36-6-401, it is clearly referring to the same sixteen factors cited repeatedly herein, i.”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(c): 2 cases
Dana Jo Stricklin v. Jerone Trent Stricklin, 490 S.W.3d 8 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2015). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 36-6-404(c) (2014). Our opinion on this issue, however, should not be construed as negating the importance of proving a material change of circumstance in contested cases.”
Misty Oliver Allen v. Mario Pryor Allen, No. W2017-02332-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Sept. 28, 2018).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(c)(1)(A): 1 case
Eric Bryan Howard v. Kelly Jo Halford, No. E2014-00002-COA-R3-JV (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 22, 2014).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(c)(2): 1 case
Leslie Kay Johnson v. Darren Tracy Johnson, No. E2012-02618-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Sept. 23, 2013).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(c)(3): 4 cases
Dominick J. Leonardo v. Ashli Leonardo, No. M2014-00372-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. June 18, 2015).
DL Rummage v. Kimberly Rummage, No. M2016-02356-COA-R3-CV, 2018 WL 2134018 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 9, 2018).
Melissa Taylor v. Terry Taylor Jr., No. W2001-02247-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 22, 2002).
Misty Oliver Allen v. Mario Pryor Allen, No. W2017-02332-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Sept. 28, 2018).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(d): 1 case
Dominick J. Leonardo v. Ashli Leonardo, No. M2014-00372-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. June 18, 2015).
Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(e): 1 case
Angela Phillips v. William Phillips, No. W2001-01685-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 28, 2001).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.