Skip to main content

Jeremy Ash v. Jaclyn Ash

Tenn. Ct. App.September 6, 2019No. M2018-00901-COA-R3-CV
RemandedJaclyn Ash

Case Details

Judge(s)
Judge D. Michael Swiney
Status
Published
Procedural Posture
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Excerpt

This appeal arises from a post-divorce dispute over child custody wherein the father filed a petition to modify the permanent parenting plan. Following a hearing in October 2017, the Trial Court found that a material change in circumstance existed and implemented a temporary parenting plan, determining that plan to be in the child's best interest. Thereafter in April 2018, the Trial Court converted that temporary parenting plan into a permanent parenting plan upon its determination that the temporary plan appeared to be working satisfactorily. Mother appeals to this Court. Because the Trial Court did not conduct a best interest analysis or make the required statutory finding of best interest, we vacate the April 2018 judgment of the Trial Court and remand for further proceedings as necessary. We affirm the Trial Court in all other respects.

What This Ruling Means

**What happened:** This case was actually a family law dispute, not an employment law matter. Jeremy Ash and Jaclyn Ash were divorced parents fighting over custody of their child. Jeremy wanted to change their existing parenting arrangement. In October 2017, a trial court found there had been significant changes in circumstances and created a temporary custody plan. Several months later in April 2018, the court made that temporary plan permanent. **What the court decided:** The appeals court sent the case back to the lower court for further proceedings. The excerpt provided cuts off mid-sentence, so the specific reasons for sending it back aren't clear from the available information. **Why this matters for workers:** This case doesn't actually relate to employment law or workplace rights, despite being initially categorized that way. It's a child custody dispute between former spouses. Workers looking for employment law guidance should focus on cases that actually involve workplace issues like wages, discrimination, harassment, wrongful termination, or working conditions. This case would not provide any relevant precedent or insights for employment-related legal matters.

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

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.

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.