Timothy A. Baxter v. Jennifer D. Rowan - Concur ( 2020 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                             12/15/2020
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
    AT JACKSON
    September 15, 2020 Session
    TIMOTHY A. BAXTER v. JENNIFER D. ROWAN
    Appeal from the Juvenile Court for Madison County
    No. 55-48873        Larry McKenzie, Judge
    ___________________________________
    No. W2018-02209-COA-R3-JV
    ___________________________________
    KENNY ARMSTRONG, J., concurring separately.
    I concur in the majority’s holding that an unwed father, who previously executed a
    VAP, has standing to sue for custody and visitation rights to his minor child. I also
    concur in the holding reversing the trial court’s award of visitation rights to the paternal
    grandmother. I write separately only to highlight my concern about the procedure used
    by the unwed father in this case to obtain his visitation rights. Here, father filed his
    motion to obtain visitation rights under Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-6-301.
    However, from my research, section 36-6-301 is inapplicable to custody and visitation
    proceedings that involve parents who have never been married. Rather, I am of the
    opinion that, in cases such as the one at bar, where the parents were never married,
    Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-2-311 is the only mechanism by which visitation
    rights may be obtained. Section 36-2-311 is the parentage statute that specifically
    addresses a trial court’s authority to make an order determining custody and visitation
    rights where unwed parents are involved. Graham v. Caples, 
    325 S.W.3d 578
    , 582
    (Tenn. 2010) (citation omitted) (“Where a conflict is presented between two statutes, a
    more specific statutory provision takes precedence over a more general provision.”).
    Section 36-2-311 provides, in pertinent part, that, “Upon establishing parentage, the court
    shall make an order declaring the father of the child. This order shall include the
    following . . . [d]etermination of visitation or parental access pursuant to chapter 6 of this
    title.” Because father is claiming visitation rights based on his execution of a VAP and
    because mother and father were never married, I conclude that the only mechanism by
    which father may seek visitation is through section 36-2-311.
    s/ Kenny Armstrong
    KENNY ARMSTRONG, JUDGE
    

Document Info

Docket Number: W2018-02209-COA-R3-JV

Judges: Judge Kenny Armstrong

Filed Date: 12/15/2020

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021