Etta Mechelle Parks v. Craig DeWayne Parks

• Court: Court of Appeals of Tennessee
• Decided: July 8, 1998
• Docket: 03A01-9711-GS-00519
• Status: Published

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE FILED July 8, 1998

ETTA MECHELLE PARKS, ) C/A NO. 03A01-9711-GS-00519 Cecil Crowson, Jr. ) Appellate C ourt Clerk Plaintiff-Appellant, ) ) ) ) v. ) APPEAL AS OF RIGHT FROM ) THE CAMPBELL COUNTY ) GENERAL SESSIONS COURT ) ) ) ) CRAIG DEWAYNE PARKS, ) ) HONORABLE ROCKY H. YOUNG, Defendant-Appellee. ) JUDGE

For Appellant For Appellee

JOHNNY V. DUNAWAY J. STEPHEN HURST Dunaway Law Office Rogers, Hurst & Kruskenski LaFollette, Tennessee LaFollette, Tennessee

MEMORANDUM OPINION

AFFIRMED AND REMANDED Susano, J.

1 In this divorce case, the appellant Etta Mechelle Parks

argues that the trial court erred in awarding her former husband,

Craig Dewayne Parks, custody of their two boys, ages seven and

almost four. We do not find that the evidence preponderates

against the trial court’s custody decree. See Rule 13(d),

T.R.A.P.; Hass v. Knighton, 676 S.W.2d 554, 555 (Tenn. 1984).

Accordingly, we cannot say that the trial court abused its

discretion in placing the children’s sole custody with Mr. Parks.

See Grant v. Grant, 286 S.W.2d 349, 350 (Tenn.App. 1954).

The appellee seeks damages for a frivolous appeal

pursuant to the provisions of T.C.A. § 27-1-122. While we have

decided appellant’s sole issue adverse to her, we do not find her

appeal to be frivolous.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed pursuant to

the provisions of Rule 10(b), Rules of the Court of Appeals.1

Costs on appeal are taxed to the appellant and her surety. This

case is remanded to the trial court for enforcement of the

judgment and for collection of costs assessed below, all pursuant

to applicable law.

___________________________ Charles D. Susano, Jr., J.

1 Rule 10(b), Rules of the Court of Appeals, provides as follows:

The Court, with the concurrence of all judges participating in the case, may affirm, reverse or modify the actions of the trial court by memorandum opinion when a formal opinion would have no precedential value. When a case is decided by memorandum opinion it shall be designated “MEMORANDUM OPINION,” shall not be published, and shall not be cited or relied on for any reason in a subsequent unrelated case.

2 3 CONCUR:

________________________ Houston M. Goddard, P.J.

________________________ Don T. McMurray, J.