I N THE COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF TENNESSEE ) KNOX J UVENI LE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVI CES, ) C. A. NO. 03A01- 9609- J V- 0028 6 ) Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l e e ) ) ) ) ) ) vs . ) HON. CAREY E. GARETT ) J UDGE ) ) ) ) ) J OE ERI C TAYLOR, SR. , ) REVERSED AND REMANDED ) De f e nda nt - Appe l l a nt )
SHARON F. PATTERSON, Knoxvi l l e , f or Appe l l a nt .
CHARLES W BURSON, At t or ne y Ge ne r a l a nd Re por t e r , a nd W LLI AM ASHBY . I SM TH, As s i s t a nt At t or ne y Ge ne r a l , f or a ppe l l e e . I
O P I N I O N
M M r a y, J . c ur
Thi s i s a n a ppe a l f r om a j udgme nt of t h e j u v e n i l e c our t of
Kn o x Co u nt y whe r e i n t he c our t t e r mi na t e d t he pa r e nt a l r i ght s of t h e a pp e l l a nt ( de f e nda nt ) . For r e a s ons he r e i na f t e r s t a t e d, we r e ve r s e
t h e j u d gme nt of t he t r i a l c our t .
The de f e nda nt i s t he na t ur a l f a t he r of Ra ymond Ant hony Ta y l o r
a nd J oe Er i c Ta yl or , Jr. , bot h mi nor s . The na t ur a l mot h e r
s u r r e n d e r e d he r pa r e nt a l r i ght s pr i o r t o t he he a r i ng t e r mi na t i ng
t he d e f e nda nt ' s r i ght s . The r e c or d r e f l e c t s t ha t t he c hi l dr e n h a d
b e e n p l a c e d i n a f os t e r home a nd ha d be e n wi t h t he i r pr e s e nt f os t e r
p a r e n t s s ome f i f t e e n mont hs .
The St a t e of Te nne s s e e t hr ough t he De pa r t me nt of Hu ma n
Se r v i c e s f i l e d a pe t i t i on t o t e r mi na t e t he de f e nda nt ' s pa r e n t a l
r i ght s . The de f e nda nt f i l e d a r e s pons e t o t he pe t i t i on pr o s e .
The c a s e pr oc e e de d t o t r i a l wi t h t he de f e nda nt not ha vi ng t h e
b e n e f i t of c ouns e l a nd a ga i n a c t e d pr o s e . At t he c onc l us i on o f
t he t r i a l t he c our t f ound t ha t t he de f e nda nt ' s pa r e nt a l r i gh t s
s h o u l d be t e r mi na t e d a nd e nt e r e d a j udgme nt a c c or di ngl y.
De f e nda nt c ha l l e nge s t he pr opr i e t y of t he t r i a l c our t ' s a c t i o n
i n p r o c e e di ng t o t r i a l wi t hout f i r s t a dvi s i ng t he de f e nda nt of h i s
r i g h t t o c ouns e l a nd e xp l a i n i ng hi s r i ght s t o hi m a s r e qui r e d b y
t he Te n n e s s e e Rul e s of J uve ni l e Pr oc e dur e . De f e nda nt a l s o c ompl a i n s
o f t h e a dmi s s i on of c e r t a i n e vi de nt i a r y ma t t e r s .
2 W wi l l a ddr e s s t he i s s ue r e l a t i ng t o t he c our t ' s f a i l ur e t o e
a d v i s e t he de f e nda nt of hi s r i ght t o c ouns e l a nd t he f a i l ur e of t h e
c our t t o a ppoi nt c ouns e l . Fr om a c ons t i t ut i ona l vi e wpoi nt t he
Un i t e d St a t e s Supr e me Cou r t ha s de t e r mi ne d t ha t pa r e nt s ha v e a
f u n d a me nt a l r i ght to t he car e, c us t ody a nd c ont r ol of t he i r
c h i l d r e n. St a nl e y v. I l l i noi s , 4 05 U. S. 645, 92 S. Ct . 1208, 31
L. Ed. 2 d 551 ( 1972) It ha s l i ke wi s e be e n e s t a bl i s he d in t hi s
j ur i s d i c t i on t ha t our c ons t i t ut i on ( Ar t i c l e I , Se c t i on 8 ) r e c og -
n i z e s a f unda me nt a l r i ght of a pa r e n t t o t he c a r e , c us t ody a n d
c ont r ol of t he i r c hi l dr e n. Ha wk v . Ha wk , 855 S. W 2d 573, . 577
( Te n n . 1 993) . I n Na l e v. Robe r t s on , 871 S. W 2d ( Te nn . . 1 9 94) t h e
c o u r t ma de t he f ol l owi ng obs e r va t i ons :
Thi s Cour t f ound i n Da vi s v. Da vi s , 842 S. W 2d 588, . 6 0 0 ( Te nn. 1992) , t ha t " t he r e i s a r i g h t of i ndi vi dua l p r i va c y gua r a nt e e d unde r a nd pr ot e c t e d by t he l i be r t y c l a us e s of t he Te nne s s e e De c l a r a t i on of Ri ght s . " Thi s c o ns t i t ut i ona l r i ght o f pr i va c y i nc l ude s pa r e nt a l r i ght s .
I n l i ght of t hi s r i ght t o pr i va c y, we be l i e ve t ha t whe n no s ubs t a nt i a l ha r m t hr e a t e ns a c hi l d' s we l f a r e , t he s t a t e l a c ks a s uf f i c i e nt l y c ompe l l i ng j us t i f i c a t i on f or t h e i nf r i nge me nt on t he f unda me nt a l r i ght of pa r e nt s t o r a i s e t he i r c hi l dr e n a s t he y s e e f i t .
Th e r i ght t o c ouns e l ha s a l s o be e n a ddr e s s e d bot h by t he U. S.
Sup r e me Cour t a nd our a ppe l l a t e c our t s . I n Hows on v. Hows on , an
u n r e p o r t e d opi ni on of t hi s c our t , 1993 Te nn. App. Le xi s 457, t he
c o u r t e d not e d:
3 Unde r t he U. S. Cons t i t ut i on, p a r e nt s do not ha ve a n a b s ol ut e r i ght t o c ouns e l i n s uc h pr oc e e di ngs [ t e r mi na - t i on of pa r e nt a l r i g ht s ] . M n, [ St a t e e x r e l . T. H. b y i H. H. v . M n, 802 S. W 2d 625 ( Te nn. App. 1990) ] a t 626, i . c i t i ng La s s i t e r v. De pa r t me nt o f Soc i a l Se r vi c e s o f Du r ha m Ci t y , 452 U. S. 18, 101 S. Ct . 2153, 68 L. Ed. 2d 6 4 0 ( 1981) . The t r i a l c our t mus t c ons i de r t he i nt e r e s t s o f t he St a t e , t h e i nt e r e s t s of t he pa r e nt s , a nd t he r i s k t ha t a f a i l ur e t o a ppoi nt c ouns e l wi l l l e a d t o a n e r r one ous r e s u l t . The M n c our t a na l yz e d La s s i t e r i n i l i ght of l a t e r Supr e me Cour t de c i s i ons a nd s umma r i z e d how t o a s s e s s t he r i s k of e r r one ous r e s ul t s on t he me r i t s a s f o l l ows :
" To h e l p a s s e s s t he r i s k of a n unf a i r pr oc e e di ng r e s ul t i ng i n a n e r r one ous de c i s i on, t he c our t s i n La s s i t e r a nd Da v i s ha ve l i s t e d s e ve r a l f a c t or s t ha t be a r on t he q u e s t i on. The y i nc l ude : ( 1) whe t he r e xpe r t me di c a l a nd/ or ps yc hi a t r i c t e s t i mony i s pr e s e nt e d a t t he he a r i ng; ( 2) whe t he r t h e pa r e nt s ha ve h a d u nc ommon di f f i c ul t y i n de a l i ng wi t h l i f e a nd l i f e s i t ua t i ons ; ( 3) whe t he r t he pa r e nt s a r e t hr us t i nt o a di s t r e s s i ng a nd di s or i e nt i ng s i t ua - t i on a t t he he a r i ng; ( 4) t he di f f i c ul t y a nd c om- pl e x i t y of t he i s s ue s a nd pr oc e dur e s ; ( 5) t he pos s i bi l i t y o f c r i mi na l s e l f - i nc r i mi na t i on; ( 6) t he e duc a t i ona l ba c kgr ound of t he pa r e nt s ; a nd ( 7) t he pe r ma ne nc y of po t e nt i a l de pr i va t i on of t he c hi l d i n que s t i on. "
Our pr e s e nt Rul e s of J uve ni l e Pr oc e dur e be c a me e f f e c t i ve J u l y
1, 1984. Si nc e t he s e r ul e s pos t da t e La s s i t e r , i t woul d a ppe a r t ha t
i n o r d e r t o i ns ur e t ha t t he c ondi t i ons t he r e i n s t a t e d a r e pr ope r l y
c o n s i d e r e d, t he Te nne s s e e Supr e me Cour t a nd t he Ge ne r a l As s e mbl y ,
by t he a dopt i on of t he Rul e s of J u v e ni l e Pr oc e dur e , pr ovi d e d
mi ni mu m r e qui r e me nt s whi c h t he t r i al c our t mus t f ol l ow whe n a
p a r e n t a ppe a r s a t a t e r mi na t i on he a r i ng wi t hout a n a t t or ne y.
4 Rul e 39, Te n n e s s e e Ru l e s of J uve ni l e Pr oc e dur e , pr ovi de s i n
p e r t i ne nt pa r t a s f ol l ows :
Rul e 3 9 . Te r m nat i on o f Pa r e nt al Ri ght s . . . . i
* * * *
( f ) Ad j udi c a t or y He a r i ng o n Te r mi na t i on.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
I N THE COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF TENNESSEE ) KNOX J UVENI LE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVI CES, ) C. A. NO. 03A01- 9609- J V- 0028 6 ) Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l e e ) ) ) ) ) ) vs . ) HON. CAREY E. GARETT ) J UDGE ) ) ) ) ) J OE ERI C TAYLOR, SR. , ) REVERSED AND REMANDED ) De f e nda nt - Appe l l a nt )
SHARON F. PATTERSON, Knoxvi l l e , f or Appe l l a nt .
CHARLES W BURSON, At t or ne y Ge ne r a l a nd Re por t e r , a nd W LLI AM ASHBY . I SM TH, As s i s t a nt At t or ne y Ge ne r a l , f or a ppe l l e e . I
O P I N I O N
M M r a y, J . c ur
Thi s i s a n a ppe a l f r om a j udgme nt of t h e j u v e n i l e c our t of
Kn o x Co u nt y whe r e i n t he c our t t e r mi na t e d t he pa r e nt a l r i ght s of t h e a pp e l l a nt ( de f e nda nt ) . For r e a s ons he r e i na f t e r s t a t e d, we r e ve r s e
t h e j u d gme nt of t he t r i a l c our t .
The de f e nda nt i s t he na t ur a l f a t he r of Ra ymond Ant hony Ta y l o r
a nd J oe Er i c Ta yl or , Jr. , bot h mi nor s . The na t ur a l mot h e r
s u r r e n d e r e d he r pa r e nt a l r i ght s pr i o r t o t he he a r i ng t e r mi na t i ng
t he d e f e nda nt ' s r i ght s . The r e c or d r e f l e c t s t ha t t he c hi l dr e n h a d
b e e n p l a c e d i n a f os t e r home a nd ha d be e n wi t h t he i r pr e s e nt f os t e r
p a r e n t s s ome f i f t e e n mont hs .
The St a t e of Te nne s s e e t hr ough t he De pa r t me nt of Hu ma n
Se r v i c e s f i l e d a pe t i t i on t o t e r mi na t e t he de f e nda nt ' s pa r e n t a l
r i ght s . The de f e nda nt f i l e d a r e s pons e t o t he pe t i t i on pr o s e .
The c a s e pr oc e e de d t o t r i a l wi t h t he de f e nda nt not ha vi ng t h e
b e n e f i t of c ouns e l a nd a ga i n a c t e d pr o s e . At t he c onc l us i on o f
t he t r i a l t he c our t f ound t ha t t he de f e nda nt ' s pa r e nt a l r i gh t s
s h o u l d be t e r mi na t e d a nd e nt e r e d a j udgme nt a c c or di ngl y.
De f e nda nt c ha l l e nge s t he pr opr i e t y of t he t r i a l c our t ' s a c t i o n
i n p r o c e e di ng t o t r i a l wi t hout f i r s t a dvi s i ng t he de f e nda nt of h i s
r i g h t t o c ouns e l a nd e xp l a i n i ng hi s r i ght s t o hi m a s r e qui r e d b y
t he Te n n e s s e e Rul e s of J uve ni l e Pr oc e dur e . De f e nda nt a l s o c ompl a i n s
o f t h e a dmi s s i on of c e r t a i n e vi de nt i a r y ma t t e r s .
2 W wi l l a ddr e s s t he i s s ue r e l a t i ng t o t he c our t ' s f a i l ur e t o e
a d v i s e t he de f e nda nt of hi s r i ght t o c ouns e l a nd t he f a i l ur e of t h e
c our t t o a ppoi nt c ouns e l . Fr om a c ons t i t ut i ona l vi e wpoi nt t he
Un i t e d St a t e s Supr e me Cou r t ha s de t e r mi ne d t ha t pa r e nt s ha v e a
f u n d a me nt a l r i ght to t he car e, c us t ody a nd c ont r ol of t he i r
c h i l d r e n. St a nl e y v. I l l i noi s , 4 05 U. S. 645, 92 S. Ct . 1208, 31
L. Ed. 2 d 551 ( 1972) It ha s l i ke wi s e be e n e s t a bl i s he d in t hi s
j ur i s d i c t i on t ha t our c ons t i t ut i on ( Ar t i c l e I , Se c t i on 8 ) r e c og -
n i z e s a f unda me nt a l r i ght of a pa r e n t t o t he c a r e , c us t ody a n d
c ont r ol of t he i r c hi l dr e n. Ha wk v . Ha wk , 855 S. W 2d 573, . 577
( Te n n . 1 993) . I n Na l e v. Robe r t s on , 871 S. W 2d ( Te nn . . 1 9 94) t h e
c o u r t ma de t he f ol l owi ng obs e r va t i ons :
Thi s Cour t f ound i n Da vi s v. Da vi s , 842 S. W 2d 588, . 6 0 0 ( Te nn. 1992) , t ha t " t he r e i s a r i g h t of i ndi vi dua l p r i va c y gua r a nt e e d unde r a nd pr ot e c t e d by t he l i be r t y c l a us e s of t he Te nne s s e e De c l a r a t i on of Ri ght s . " Thi s c o ns t i t ut i ona l r i ght o f pr i va c y i nc l ude s pa r e nt a l r i ght s .
I n l i ght of t hi s r i ght t o pr i va c y, we be l i e ve t ha t whe n no s ubs t a nt i a l ha r m t hr e a t e ns a c hi l d' s we l f a r e , t he s t a t e l a c ks a s uf f i c i e nt l y c ompe l l i ng j us t i f i c a t i on f or t h e i nf r i nge me nt on t he f unda me nt a l r i ght of pa r e nt s t o r a i s e t he i r c hi l dr e n a s t he y s e e f i t .
Th e r i ght t o c ouns e l ha s a l s o be e n a ddr e s s e d bot h by t he U. S.
Sup r e me Cour t a nd our a ppe l l a t e c our t s . I n Hows on v. Hows on , an
u n r e p o r t e d opi ni on of t hi s c our t , 1993 Te nn. App. Le xi s 457, t he
c o u r t e d not e d:
3 Unde r t he U. S. Cons t i t ut i on, p a r e nt s do not ha ve a n a b s ol ut e r i ght t o c ouns e l i n s uc h pr oc e e di ngs [ t e r mi na - t i on of pa r e nt a l r i g ht s ] . M n, [ St a t e e x r e l . T. H. b y i H. H. v . M n, 802 S. W 2d 625 ( Te nn. App. 1990) ] a t 626, i . c i t i ng La s s i t e r v. De pa r t me nt o f Soc i a l Se r vi c e s o f Du r ha m Ci t y , 452 U. S. 18, 101 S. Ct . 2153, 68 L. Ed. 2d 6 4 0 ( 1981) . The t r i a l c our t mus t c ons i de r t he i nt e r e s t s o f t he St a t e , t h e i nt e r e s t s of t he pa r e nt s , a nd t he r i s k t ha t a f a i l ur e t o a ppoi nt c ouns e l wi l l l e a d t o a n e r r one ous r e s u l t . The M n c our t a na l yz e d La s s i t e r i n i l i ght of l a t e r Supr e me Cour t de c i s i ons a nd s umma r i z e d how t o a s s e s s t he r i s k of e r r one ous r e s ul t s on t he me r i t s a s f o l l ows :
" To h e l p a s s e s s t he r i s k of a n unf a i r pr oc e e di ng r e s ul t i ng i n a n e r r one ous de c i s i on, t he c our t s i n La s s i t e r a nd Da v i s ha ve l i s t e d s e ve r a l f a c t or s t ha t be a r on t he q u e s t i on. The y i nc l ude : ( 1) whe t he r e xpe r t me di c a l a nd/ or ps yc hi a t r i c t e s t i mony i s pr e s e nt e d a t t he he a r i ng; ( 2) whe t he r t h e pa r e nt s ha ve h a d u nc ommon di f f i c ul t y i n de a l i ng wi t h l i f e a nd l i f e s i t ua t i ons ; ( 3) whe t he r t he pa r e nt s a r e t hr us t i nt o a di s t r e s s i ng a nd di s or i e nt i ng s i t ua - t i on a t t he he a r i ng; ( 4) t he di f f i c ul t y a nd c om- pl e x i t y of t he i s s ue s a nd pr oc e dur e s ; ( 5) t he pos s i bi l i t y o f c r i mi na l s e l f - i nc r i mi na t i on; ( 6) t he e duc a t i ona l ba c kgr ound of t he pa r e nt s ; a nd ( 7) t he pe r ma ne nc y of po t e nt i a l de pr i va t i on of t he c hi l d i n que s t i on. "
Our pr e s e nt Rul e s of J uve ni l e Pr oc e dur e be c a me e f f e c t i ve J u l y
1, 1984. Si nc e t he s e r ul e s pos t da t e La s s i t e r , i t woul d a ppe a r t ha t
i n o r d e r t o i ns ur e t ha t t he c ondi t i ons t he r e i n s t a t e d a r e pr ope r l y
c o n s i d e r e d, t he Te nne s s e e Supr e me Cour t a nd t he Ge ne r a l As s e mbl y ,
by t he a dopt i on of t he Rul e s of J u v e ni l e Pr oc e dur e , pr ovi d e d
mi ni mu m r e qui r e me nt s whi c h t he t r i al c our t mus t f ol l ow whe n a
p a r e n t a ppe a r s a t a t e r mi na t i on he a r i ng wi t hout a n a t t or ne y.
4 Rul e 39, Te n n e s s e e Ru l e s of J uve ni l e Pr oc e dur e , pr ovi de s i n
p e r t i ne nt pa r t a s f ol l ows :
Rul e 3 9 . Te r m nat i on o f Pa r e nt al Ri ght s . . . . i
* * * *
( f ) Ad j udi c a t or y He a r i ng o n Te r mi na t i on.
( 1) The c our t s h a l l c onduc t a n a dj udi c a t or y he a r i ng t o de t e r mi ne t he i s s ue s r a i s e d by t he pe t i t i on a nd by a ny a ns we r ( s ) f i l e d. Not i c e of t he he a r i ng s ha l l be pr ovi de d i n t he s ummons .
( 2) At t he be gi nni ng of t he he a r i ng, a ny pa r t y who a ppe a r s wi t hout a n a t t o r n e y s ha l l be i nf or me d of t he r i ght t o a n a t t or ne y, a nd i n t he c a s e of a n i ndi ge nt r e s ponde nt , t he c our t s ha l l c ons i d e r t he f a c t s a nd c i r c ums t a n c e s a l l e ge d a nd ma ke a de t e r mi na t i on a s t o wh e t he r a n a t t or ne y s houl d be a ppoi nt e d . ( Empha s i s our s ) .
Si nc e it is we l l - s e t t l e d t ha t a pa r e nt ha s a f unda me n t a l
r i ght , ( c ons t i t ut i ona l l y gua r a nt e e d a ga i ns t t he st at e whe n no
s u b s t a n t i a l h a r m t hr e a t e ns a c hi l d' s we l f a r e ) , t o t he c a r e , c us t o d y
a n d c o n t r ol of t he i r c hi l dr e n, we c ons i de r t he pr oc e dur e s of Ru l e
3 9 ( f ) ( 2) , r e ga r di ng t he r i ght t o ha ve a n a t t or ne y, a p poi nt e d o r
o t h e r wi s e , t o be ma nda t or y.
The t r a ns c r i pt of t he he a r i n g r e f l e c t s t ha t t he t r i a l c ou r t
f a i l e d t o a dvi s e t he de f e nda nt a t t he be gi nni ng of t he he a r i ng t h a t
he wa s e nt i t l e d to an a t t or ne y a nd f ur t he r f ai l ed to ma k e a
p r e l i mi na r y f i ndi ng of i ndi ge nc y or non- i ndi ge nc y. The r e c or d do e s
n o t d e mo ns t r a t e t ha t t he c our t c ons i de r e d t he f a c t s e nume r a t e d i n
5 La s s i t e r or Da vi s t o ma ke a de t e r mi na t i on of whe t he r t h i s wa s a
p r o p e r c a s e f or t he a ppoi nt me nt of a n a t t or ne y. W f i nd t hi s t o b e e
r e v e r s i bl e e r r or .
The a bove i s s ue i s di s pos i t i ve of t he a ppe a l , howe ve r , we wi l l
b r i e f l y di s c us s t he i s s ue r e l a t i ng t o t h e a dmi s s i on of e vi de n c e .
At t h e he a r i ng, t he a t t or ne y f or t he De pa r t me nt of Huma n Se r vi c e s
i n t r o d u c e d e vi de nc e by wa y of c r os s e xa mi na t i on of c onduc t by t h e 1 d e f e n d a nt , whe n he wa s 10 ye a r s o l d . Rul e 608( 3) ( c ) , Te nne s s e e
Ru l e s o f e vi de nc e pr ovi de s a s f ol l ows :
( c ) J uve ni l e Conduc t . - Evi de nc e of s pe c i f i c i n s t a nc e s of c onduc t of a wi t ne s s c ommi t t e d whi l e t he wi t ne s s wa s a j uve ni l e i s ge ne r a l l y not a dmi s s i bl e unde r t hi s r ul e . The c our t ma y, howe ve r , a l l ow e vi de nc e of s uc h c o nduc t o f a wi t ne s s ot he r t ha n t he a c c us e d i n a c r i mi na l c a s e i f t he c onduc t woul d be a dmi s s i bl e t o a t t a c k t he c r e di bi l i t y o f a n a du l t a nd t he c our t i s s a t i s f i e d t ha t a d mi s s i on i n e vi de nc e i s ne c e s s a r y f or a f a i r de t e r mi na - t i on i n a c i vi l a c t i on or c r i mi na l pr oc e e di ng.
On r e ma nd, t he c our t s houl d e xa mi ne t he e vi de nc e of t he
d e f e n d a nt ' s j uve ni l e c ond u c t unde r t he a bove r ul e . St a t e d
o t h e r wi s e , t he c our t mus t de t e r mi ne if t he e vi de nc e woul d be
a d mi s s i bl e t o a t t a c k t he c r e di bi l i t y of a n a dul t a nd ma ke a f ur t h e r
f i n d i n g t ha t a dmi s s i on of t he e vi de nc e i s ne c e s s a r y f or a f ai r
d e t e r mi na t i on o f t he c a s e .
1 Although no objection was made to the evidence, the failure to do so may be the result of the lack of proper legal advice.
6 W r e ve r s e t he j udgme nt of t he t r i a l c our t . e I n s o doi ng, we
d o n o t e xpr e s s a ny opi ni on on t he me r i t s of a ny i s s ue be f or e t h e
c o u r t o n r e ma nd.
Th i s c a us e i s r e ma nde d t o t he t r i a l c our t f or s uc h ot he r a n d
f ur t h e r a c t i on a s ma y be ne c e s s a r y t o c onc l ude t hi s c a s e . Cos t s o f
t h i s a ppe a l a r e a s s e s s e d t o t he a ppe l l e e .
___________________________ _ _ _ Don T. M M r a y, J udge c ur
CONCUR:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____________________________ Ho u s t o n M Godda r d, Pr e s i di ng J udge .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____________________________ He r s c h e l P. Fr a nks , J udge
7 I N THE COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF TENNESSEE ) KNOX J UVENI LE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVI CES, ) C. A. NO. 03A01- 9609- J V- 0028 6 ) Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l e e ) ) ) ) ) ) vs . ) HON. CAREY E. GARETT ) J UDGE ) ) ) ) ) J OE ERI C TAYLOR, SR. , ) REVERSED AND REMANDED ) De f e nda nt - Appe l l a nt )
JUDGMENT
Thi s a ppe a l c a me o n t o be he a r d upon t he r e c or d f r om t h e
J u v e n i l e Cour t of Knox Count y, br i e f s a nd a r gume nt of c ouns e l .
Up o n c o n s i de r a t i on t he r e of , t hi s Cour t i s of t he opi ni on t ha t t he r e
wa s r e ve r s i bl e e r r or i n t he t r i a l c our t .
W r e ve r s e t he j udgme nt e of t he t r i a l c our t . Thi s c a us e i s
r e ma nd e d t o t he t r i a l c our t f or s uc h ot he r a n d f u r t he r a c t i on a s
ma y b e ne c e s s a r y t o c onc l ude t hi s c a s e . Cos t s of t hi s a ppe a l a r e
a s s e s s e d t o t he a ppe l l e e . PER CURI AM