Law Blog

According to the catechism of the Catholic church, a divorced person is forbidden from receiving the sacrament of holy communion unless they have their marriage annulled.

The Department of Justice under President Obama has stood down from conducting prosecutions of local pot farmers in the wake of decriminalization, medical marijuana laws, and outright legalization. That is why the recent conviction of a Marshal man claiming a First Amendment freedom of religion right is surprising.

Our law firm has experience representing students and young people in charges known as “minor in possession” of alcohol. It is a misdemeanor for a person under the age of 21 to possess or consume alcohol.

Many times, representing parents in custody disputes, our lawyers note the blurred lines between parenting time and custody. Legal concepts such as the existence of an “established custodial environment”, legal and physical custody...

Occasionally, we have experienced cases where a parent is continually running to Child Protective Services to lodge a series of baseless or minor complaints against the other parent.

Often, we see parents reassess their entire lives and make a series of rapid significant life-changes in the wake of divorce. Changing jobs, counties, even states, is common.

Sometimes, a judge is just looking for some cheap professional attention. That’s what we suspect occurred this week when a Tennessee family court judge cited the SCOTUS marriage equality decision, among other reasons, as the stated basis for denying an elderly couple’s divorce. After hearing from 7 witnesses and considering dozens of exhibits over 4-days, Hamilton County Chancellor Jeffrey Atherton refused to grant the divorce sought by the litigants. And now, perhaps by the Chancellor’s design, here comes his 15-minutes of ill-conceived fame. In denying the requested relief upon completion of the proofs, the Chancellor stated that because of the SCOTUS decision in Obergefell v Hodges, the Supreme Court now needed to clarify, “when a marriage is no longer a marriage.” The judge’s reasoning is flawed to the extent that whatever our High Court has defined as a fundamental right within the context of marriage has nothing relevant to do with a state law divorce proceeding. Chancellor Atherton further concluded that because the SCOTUS has deemed Tennesseans incompetent to define the central institution of marriage, he is somehow judicially hamstrung on the performance of his sworn duties. Those duties would include presiding over and resolving a contested divorce proceeding through a judgment. What the…? Is this guy trying to match wits with Kim Davis over in Kentucky? Divorce proceedings rarely go to trial. When they do, one of the findings a family court judge is required to make is whether the objects of matrimony have been destroyed such that there is no reasonable likelihood the marriage can be repaired; the ole “irreconcilable differences”. Usually, the simple fact that a complaint for divorce was filed is sufficient. To properly conduct a divorce trial, the family court judge makes factual findings in the case -usually about the parties’ property in a case like this, without children. Also, the judge makes legal decisions based on the fact findings, like whether alimony is appropriate. Then, the judge must issue a judgment of divorce setting forth the findings of fact and conclusions of law. In this case, after 4-days of testimony, Chancellor Atherton concluded the marriage could be salvaged and hoped the couple reconciled. It appears to us, however, that this couple has become victim to the judge’s personal desire to grab headlines by stating his political differences with the Obergefell marriage equality decision. Divorce is difficult enough for couples without this form of petulant judicial grandstanding. We will continue to monitor this case in order to see what “work around” is utilized to correct this judge’s harmful error. In blogging about the marriage equality civil rights movement over the past decade, we predicted that, if the SCOTUS established a fundamental right to marriage, as it did in Obergefell, there would be plenty of fallout; instances where people in positions of power, like this county judge in Tennessee and like the court clerk in Kentucky, simply refuse to obey the law of the land.

A defendant in Jackson County was tried for murder in the 2010 death of his 3-month old son. The prosecutor’s theory was that the father caused his infant son’s death by shaking him or throwing him against a wall.

Here at Clarkston Legal, we see many custody battles unfold in the family court. Over the years, our law firm has developed experience in the defense and the prosecution of child custody battles; we have become students of the industry.

If the parties to a divorce do not settle their divorce, then a family court will decide the issues in the case, including spousal support and whether income should be imputed to a non-earning spouse. The court’s decision is discretionary thus, what the court orders will stand unless that powerful discretion is somehow abused; that is precisely what happened in Loutts v Loutts regarding the issue of alimony.