Skip to main content

Charles Michael Vance, II v. Angela Michelle Taylor Vance

Tenn. Ct. App.March 16, 2018No. M2017-00622-COA-R3-CV
RemandedAngela Michelle Taylor Vance

Case Details

Judge(s)
Judge Andy D. Bennett
Status
Published
Procedural Posture
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Excerpt

The issues on appeal involve the proper number of days upon which to base the calculation of child support, the propriety of the award of extraordinary educational expenses under the parties' permanent parenting plan, and attorney's fees. Having determined that the trial court erred in its determination of child support and extraordinary educational expenses, we affirm in part, and vacate and remand in part.

What This Ruling Means

**What happened:** This case was actually a family law dispute, not an employment law case. Charles Michael Vance, II and Angela Michelle Taylor Vance were divorced parents fighting over child support payments and who should pay for their child's special educational expenses. They also disagreed about attorney's fees. The main issues were how many days should be used to calculate child support and whether one parent should have to pay extra costs for their child's education beyond regular school expenses. **What the court decided:** The appeals court found that the lower court made mistakes in calculating the child support amount and in deciding about the educational expenses. The court partially agreed with some parts of the original decision but sent the case back to the lower court to fix the errors and make new decisions on child support and educational costs. **Why this matters for workers:** This case doesn't directly impact workers' rights since it's about family matters rather than workplace issues. However, it shows how divorce and child support calculations can affect a person's finances, which could indirectly impact their work life and financial stability.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Similar Rulings

MATTHEW HAWN v. SULLIVAN COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION
Tenn. Ct. App.May 2026
Mixed Result
SIGNAL PUMP, LLC D/B/A SIGNAL POWER v. ARROW ELECTRONICS, INC.
Tenn. Ct. App.Apr 2026
Defendant Win
Cedar Nordbye v. University of Memphis
Tenn. Ct. App.Mar 2026
Defendant Win
HAMILTON COUNTY v. TAX YEAR 2010 DELINQUENT TAXPAYERS
Tenn. Ct. App.Mar 2026
Defendant Win
MONA WORD v. KNOX COUNTY
Tenn. Ct. App.Feb 2026

Plaintiff brought claims against Knox County and the County Clerk based on allegedly discriminatory employment practices. The trial court determined that Plaintiff committed serious discovery violations and imposed as a sanction the exclusion of certain evidence. With this evidence excluded, the trial court granted summary judgment to the Defendants. Plaintiff appeals, challenging the discovery sanction, the trial court's conclusion under the Tennessee Human Rights Act that the continuing violation doctrine did not apply, the trial court's conclusion that the Clerk was not individually liable, and the award of attorney's fees against the Plaintiff and her attorney. We affirm.

Mixed Result
Read Full OpinionMore Angela Michelle Taylor Vance RulingsAll Rulings

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

Check Your RightsLearn the Basics

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.