1

The Department of Human Services elected not to file a brief in this

matter, pointing out that the child at issue is no longer in its physical or

legal custody.

1

FILED

October 4, 1996

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate Court Clerk

I N THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

STATE OF TENNESSEE ) C/ A NO. 03A01- 9604- J V- 00150

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVI CES, ) BRADLEY COUNTY J UVENI LE COURT

 )

Pe t i t i one r - Appe l l e e , )

 )

a nd )

 )

 )

WI LLI AM D. GARDNER a nd )

J OANN GARDNER, )

 )

I nt e r ve ni ng )

Pe t i t i one r s - Appe l l e e s , ) 

 )

 )

 )

v. ) 

 )

 )

 )

DANA D. DEFRI ECE, )

 )

Re s ponde nt - Appe l l a nt . )

 )

I N THE MATTER OF: )

 ) 

J OHN DEFRI ECE, ) HONORABLE C. VAN DEACON, J R. ,

 a mi nor . ) J UDGE

For Appe l l a nt For Appe l l e e s Ga r dne r s

1

 

DEBRA L. HOUSE RANDY G. ROGERS

Sout heas t Te nne s s ee Le ga l At he ns , Te nne s s e e

 Se r vi ces 

Cl e ve l a nd, Te nne s s e e

O P I N I O N

VACATED AND REMANDED Sus a no, J .
2

Th e t r i a l cour t al s o t e r mi n a t e d t h e par e n t a l r i ght s of t h e chi l d ’ s

n a t u r a l f a t h e r , J a c k J . De f r i e c e . Th a t j udgme n t wa s not appe a l e d .

3

I n ad d i t i o n t o Joh n , Mo t h e r h as t h r ee o t h e r mi n o r ch i l d r e n : Ka t i e

( DOB: Augus t 18, 1986) ; Ti f f a ny ( DOB: J u l y 6, 1989) ; and Amb e r ( DOB: Augus t 3,

1 9 9 1 ) . At p r esent , Mo t h e r h as cust o d y o f Ka t i e . Mo t h e r sur r e n d e r e d h e r

p a r e n t a l r i ght s t o Amb e r , wh i l e Ti f f a ny r e ma i n s i n t h e cus t ody of t h e

De p a r t me n t o f Hu ma n Se r v i ces. Si n ce t h i s app eal co n cer n s J o h n , we ad d r ess

o n l y t h o se i s s u es bear i n g o n t h e t e r mi n a t i o n o f Mo t h e r ’ s par e n t a l r i g h t s as t o

t h a t chi l d .

2

The tr i a l c our t te r mi na t e d the pa r e nt a l r i ght s of Da na

D. De f r i e c e ( Mot he r ) t o he r s on, J ohn De f r i e c e ( J ohn) ( DOB:

J a nua r y 9, 1988) .

2

 Mot he r a ppe a l s , r a i s i ng t hr e e i s s ue s t ha t

pr e s e nt t he f ol l owi ng que s t i ons :

1. I s t he pr ope r a ppe a l r out e i n t hi s c a s e

di r e c t l y t o t he Cour t of Appe a l s or r a t he r t o

c i r c uit c our t f or a de nov o he a r i ng?

2. Do t he a l l e ga t i ons of t he i nt e r ve ni ng

pe t i t i on s a t i s f y the r e qui r e me nt s of T. C. A. §

37- 1- 147( a ) ( 1991) ?

3. Is the tr i a l c our t ’ s te r mi na tion of

Mot he r ’ s pa r e nt a l r i ght s s uppor t e d by c l e a r

a nd c onvi nc i ng e vi de nc e ?

I

The tr i a l c our t initia lly pl a c e d Mot he r ’ s f our mi nor

c hi l dr e n, i nc l udi ng J ohn3

, i n t he pr ot e c t i ve c us t ody of t he

De pa r t me nt of Huma n Se r vi ces ( DHS) . The f os t e r car e pl a n i n t he

r ecor d i ndi cat e s t ha t t he r eas ons f or t he pl aceme nt we r e Mot he r ’ s

a bus e of a l c ohol a nd dr ugs ; he r f a i l ur e t o pr ovi de a s t a bl e home

f or t he c hi l dr e n; a nd he r move me nt wi t h t he c hi l dr e n i nt o a nd out

of a boy f r i e nd’ s r e s i de nc e a l l wi t hi n one we e k. The pl a n a l s o

not e s t ha t DHS ha d ma de “al l r eas ona bl e ef f or t s t o pr e ve nt
3

t hi s r e mova l , ” t ha t Mot he r ha d be e n of f e r e d c ouns e l i ng a nd da y

c a r e , a nd t ha t s he ha d move d out of hous i ng pr ovi de d by a l oc a l

c hur c h. Af t e r a he a r i ng on DHS’ s pe t i t i on, t he t r i a l c our t f ound

t he c hi l dr e n de pe nde nt a nd ne gl e c t e d a nd a wa r de d t he i r c us t ody t o

DHS. The c our t or de r e d t ha t Mot he r s e e k j ob t r a i ni ng, pl a c e me nt

t hr ough Voc a t i ona l Re ha bi l i t a t i on, obt a i n he r GED, a nd f ul l y

c ompl y wi t h t he f os t e r c a r e pl a n.

J ohn ha s r e s i de d pr i ma r i l y wi t h t he i nt e r ve ni ng

pe t i t i one r s , Wi l l i a m a nd J oAnn Ga r dne r ( Ga r dne r s ) , s i nc e he wa s

t e n mont hs ol d. Af t e r t he c hi l dr e n we r e pl a c e d i n t he t e mpor a r y

c us t ody of DHS, t he Ga r dne r s f i l e d t he i r i nt e r ve ni ng pe t i t i on

( Pe t i t i on) a s ki ng t he c our t t o gr a nt t he m c us t ody of J ohn a nd hi s

s i s t e r , Ka tie , a nd s e e ki ng the te r mi na tion of the pa r e nt s ’ r i ght s

wi t h r e s pe c t t o t hos e c hi l dr e n. I n r e s pons e t o t he Pe t i t i on, t he

Gua r di a n a d Li t e m e xpr e s s e d t he opi ni on t ha t i t wa s i n t he

c hildr e n’ s be s t int e r e s t to r e ma i n with the Ga r dne r s .

The t r i a l c our t he l d t hr e e s e pa r a t e he a r i ngs on t he

Pe t i t i on. Fol l owi ng t he f i r s t he a r i ng, t he c our t a wa r de d f ul l

l e ga l c us t ody of J ohn a nd Ka t i e t o t he Ga r dne r s , f i ndi ng t ha t

Mot he r ha d “ f a i l e d t o s how a ny s ubs t a nt i a l i mpr ove me nt i n he r

c i r c ums t a nces , ” and t ha t t he Ga r dne r s we r e f i t pe r s ons t o ha ve

t he c hi l dr e n’ s c us t ody. The c our t c ont i nue d t he ma t t e r unt i l a

l a t e r da t e , a nd pr ovi de d t ha t i t s or de r woul d be c ome f i na l i f

Mot he r di d not ma ke s i gni f i c a nt pr ogr e s s . Af t e r t he s e c ond

he a r i ng, t he c our t or de r e d t ha t J ohn a nd Ka t i e r e ma i n i n t he
4

c us t ody of t he Ga r dne r s , a nd s e t t he ma t t e r f or f ur t he r r e vi e w a t

a la t e r time . Followi ng the thi r d he a r i ng, the tr i a l c our t f ound

t ha t t he s ubj e c t c hi l d, J ohn De f r i e c e , ha s

be e n i n t he c us t ody of t he Te nne s s e e

De pa r t me nt of Huma n Se r vi c e s i n e xc e s s of one

ye a r ; t ha t t he c ondi t i ons whi c h l e d t o s a i d

c hild’ s r e mova l s till pe r s i s t, tha t the r e is

little like lihood tha t s a i d c onditions will

be r e me di e d at an ear l y da t e s o t ha t t he

c hi l d c a n be r e t ur ne d t o e i t he r pa r e nt i n t he

ne a r f ut ur e , t ha t t he c ont i nua t i on of t he

l e ga l pa r e nt a nd c hi l d r e l a t i ons hi p gr e a t l y

di mi ni s he s t he c hi l d’ s c ha nc e s of e a r l y

i nt e gr a t i on i nt o a s t a bl e a nd pe r ma ne nt home ;

t ha t the la c k of s t a bility of the na t ur a l

mot he r . . . ha s be e n monume nt a l ; t ha t t he

na t ur a l mot he r c ont i nue s t o l a c k t he a bi l i t y

t o pr ovi de f or t he s ubj e c t c hi l dr e n . . . .

The c our t t hus f ound t ha t i t wa s i n J ohn’ s be s t i nt e r e s t f or

Mot he r ’ s pa r e nt a l r i ght s t o be t e r mi na t e d a nd f or J ohn t o be

pl a c e d i n t he f ul l c us t ody of t he Ga r dne r s . The c our t

s ubs e que nt l y e nt e r e d a n or de r t o t ha t e f f e c t .

I I

Our re vi e w i s de nov o upon t he r e c or d wi t h a

pr e s umpt i on of c or r e c t ne s s a s t o t he t r i a l c our t ’ s f i ndi ngs ,

unl e s s t he pr e ponde r a nc e of t he e vi de nc e i s ot he r wi s e . Rul e

13( d) , T. R. A. P.; Te nne s s ee De pt . of Human Se r v i ces v. Ri l e y , 689

S. W. 2d 164, 170 ( Te nn. App. 1984) .
5

The c r ite r i a upon whi c h the tr i a l c our t te r mi na t e d

Mot he r ’ s pa r e nt a l r i ght s a r e s e t f or t h i n T. C. A. § 37- 1- 147( d) ( 1)

( 1991) :

Af t e r hear i ng evi de nce on a t e r mi na t i on

pe tition, the c our t ma y te r mi na t e pa r e nt a l

r i ght s i f i t f i nds on t he ba s i s of c l e a r a nd

c onvi nc i ng e vi de nc e t ha t t e r mi na t i on i s i n

t he c hi l d’ s be s t i nt e r e s t a nd t ha t one ( 1) or

mor e of t he f ol l owi ng c ondi t i ons e xi s t :

( 1) The c hi l d ha s be e n r e move d f r om t he

c us t ody of t he pa r e nt by t he c our t f or a t

l e a s t one ( 1) ye a r a nd t he c our t f i nds t ha t :

 ( A) The c ondi t i ons whi c h l e d t o t he r e mova l

or

 ot he r c ondi t i ons whi c h i n a l l r e a s ona bl e

 pr oba bi l i t y woul d c a us e t he c hi l d t o be

 s ubj e c t e d t o f ur t he r a bus e or ne gl e c t a nd whi c h,

 t he r e f or e , pr e ve nt t he c hi l d’ s r e t ur n t o t he

 c a r e of the pa r e nt ( s ) s till pe r s i s t s ;

 ( B) The r e is little like lihood tha t the s e

 c ondi t i ons wi l l be r e me di e d a t a n e a r l y da t e s o

 t ha t t he c hi l d c a n be r e t ur ne d t o t he pa r e nt i n

 t he near f ut ur e ; and

 ( C) The c ont i nua t i on of t he l e ga l pa r e nt a nd

 c hild r e l a tions hi p gr e a tly di mi ni s he s the

 c hi l d’ s c ha nc e s of e a r l y i nt e gr a t i on i nt o a

 s t a bl e a nd pe r ma ne nt home [ . ]

Pr i or t o Apr i l 15, 1994, T. C. A. § 37- 1- 159( a ) ( 1991)

pr ovi de d t ha t a pa r t y a ppe a l i ng a j uve ni l e c our t ’ s de c i s i on i n a

t e r mi na tion of pa r e nt a l r i ght s c a s e wa s e ntitle d to a tr i a l de

nov o i n c i r c ui t c our t ; howe ve r , t hi s pr oc e dur e wa s c ha nge d by t he

e na c t me nt of Cha pt e r 810 of t he Publ i c Ac t s of 1994, e f f e c t i ve

Apr i l 15, 1994. The a me nde d ve r s i on of T. C. A. § 37- 1- 159 ( Supp.

1995) e l i mi na t e d t he de nov o t r i a l i n c i r c ui t c our t a nd pr ovi de d
6

i ns t e a d f or a n a ppe a l a s of r i ght di r e c t l y t o t hi s c our t . T. C. A.

§ 37- 1- 159( a ) a nd ( g) ( Supp. 1995) ; I n r e S. M., Jr . , C/ A No.

01A01- 9506- J V- 00233, 1996 WL 140410 ( Te nn. App. , M. S. , f i l e d

Ma r c h 29, 1996, Koc h, J . ) .

III

We t ur n f i r s t t o Mot he r ’ s c ont e nt i on t ha t s he i s

e ntitle d to a tr i a l de nov o in c i r c uit c our t due to the f a c t tha t

t he a me ndme nt t o T. C. A. § 37- 1- 159 ( 1991) be c a me e f f e c t i ve a f t e r

t he comme nceme nt of t he s e pr oceedi ngs . The Ga r dne r s ’ Pe t i t i on

wa s f i l e d on Fe br ua r y 11, 1993. The f i r s t he a r i ng on t he ma t t e r

wa s s t a r t e d on Augus t 24, 1993, a nd c ompl e t e d on Se pt e mbe r 29,

1993. The a me nde d ve r s i on of T. C. A. § 37- 1- 159 ( Supp. 1995)

be c a me e f f e c t i ve on Apr i l 15, 1994. The s e c ond he a r i ng wa s he l d

f i ve da ys l a t e r , on Apr i l 20, 1994. The t hi r d he a r i ng, a f t e r

whi c h Mot he r ’ s pa r e nt a l r i ght s we r e t e r mi na t e d, wa s he l d on

Augus t 25 a nd 26, 1994. As c a n be s e e n, t he c ha nge i n a ppe l l a t e

pr oc e dur e t ook e f f e c t i n t he mi ddl e of t hi s l i t i ga t i on. 

Mot he r a r gue s t ha t a ppl i c a t i on of t he a me nde d s t a t ut e

t o t hi s a ppe a l c a us e s he r unf a i r pr e j udi c e . She a r gue s i n he r

br i e f t ha t s he ha d t he r i ght t o e xpe c t a t r i a l de nov o in c i r c ui t

c our t a nd t ha t , be c a us e of t hi s e xpe c t a t i on, s he di d not t a ke

s t e ps t o pr e s e r ve t he r e c or d f or a ppe a l by e mpl oyi ng a c our t

r e por t e r t o t r a ns c r i be t he evi de nce pr e s e nt e d i n t he Br a dl e y

Count y J uve ni l e Cour t . Mot he r a r gue s t ha t t he s e c ond a nd t hi r d
7

he a r i ngs we r e s i mpl y c ont i nua t i ons of t he f i r s t he a r i ng, whi c h

wa s he l d pr i or t o t he ame ndme nt ’ s ef f ect i ve da t e . She as s e r t s

t ha t s he wa s de ni e d “ a not he r oppor t uni t y t o f ul l y pr e s e nt he r

cas e” i n ci r c ui t cour t , and t ha t t hi s cas e s houl d t he r e f or e be

r e ma nde d t o c i r c ui t c our t f or a t r i a l de nov o s o t ha t s he ma y

“ pr ope r l y pr e s e nt he r c a s e a nd pr e s e r ve a l l t e s t i mony f or

pur pos e s of a n a ppe a l , s houl d s uc h be ne c e s s a r y. ”

We mus t f i r s t de t e r mi ne whe t he r t he 1994 a me ndme nt t o

T. C. A. § 37- 1- 159 ( 1991) i s wi t hi n t he c l a s s of e na c t me nt s t ha t

ma y be a ppl i e d r e t r oa c t i ve l y t o pe ndi ng c a s e s . The ge ne r a l r ul e

i s t ha t s t a t ut e s ar e pr e s ume d t o ope r a t e pr os pect i ve l y. Kee v.

She l t e r I ns ur anc e , 852 S. W. 2d 226, 228 ( Te nn. 1993) .

Ne ve r t he l e s s , as s t a t e d by t he Supr e me Cour t ,

[ a ] n e xc e ption e xi s t s .. . for s t a t ut e s whi c h

a r e r e me di a l or pr ocedur a l i n na t ur e . Suc h

s t a t ut e s a ppl y r e t r os pe c t i ve l y, not onl y t o

caus e s of act i on ar i s i ng be f or e s uc h act s

be c ome l a w, but a l s o t o a l l s ui t s pe ndi ng

whe n the le gi s l a tion ta ke s e f f e c t, unl e s s the

l e gi s l a t ur e indi c a t e s a c ont r a r y int e ntion or

i mme di a t e a ppl i c a t i on woul d pr oduc e a n unj us t

r e s ult.

I d. (c iting Say l or s v . Ri ggs be e , 544 S. W. 2d 609, 610 ( Te nn.

1976) ) . Thus , t he que s t i on a r i s e s whe t he r t he s t a t ut e a t i s s ue

he r e i s r e me di a l or pr oc e dur a l - - a s oppos e d t o s ubs t a nt i ve - - i n

na t ur e . I n Say l or s , t he Supr e me Cour t a dopt e d t he f ol l owi ng

de s c r i pt i on of “pr ocedur e” f r om a Ka ns a s cas e :
8

[ T] he mode or pr oc e e di ng by whi c h a l e ga l

r i ght i s e nf or c e d, a s di s t i ngui s he d f r om t he

l a w whi c h gi ve s or de f i ne s t he r i ght , a nd

whi c h by me a ns of t he pr oc e e di ng, t he c our t

i s to a dmi ni st e r - the ma c hi ne r y, a s

di s t i ngui s he d f r om i t s pr oduc t ; . . . i nc l udi ng

pl e a di ng, pr oc e s s , evi de nce, and pr act i c e

. . . . Pr a c tic e [ i s ] the f or m .. . for the

e nf or c e me nt of r i ght s or t he r e dr e s s of

wr ongs , a s di s t i ngui s he d f r om t he s ubs t a nt i ve

l a w whi c h gi ve s t he r i ght or de nounc e s t he

wr ong. 

544 S. W. 2d a t 610 ( quot i ng Jone s v . Gar r e t t , 192 Ka n. 109, 386

P. 2d 194 ( 1963) ) ( e mpha s i s i n Say l or s opi ni on) . I n a ddi t i on,

r e me di a l s t a t ut e s ar e de f i ne d as

[ l ] e gi s l a t i on pr ovi di ng me a ns or me t hod

whe r e by caus e s of act i on ma y be ef f ect ua t e d,

wr ongs r e dr e s s e d a nd r e l i e f obt a i ne d . . .

Bl ac k’ s Law Di c t i onar y 1293 ( 6t h e d. 1990) . See al s o Mor f or d v .

Yong Ky un Cho, 732 S. W. 2d 617 ( Te nn. App. 1987) .

A l e gi s l a t i ve e na c t me nt c ha ngi ng t he j ur i s di c t i on of a

c our t i s r e me di a l i n na t ur e . I d. a t 620. As not e d i n Mor f or d,

t he Uni t e d St a t e s Supr e me Cour t ha s uphe l d t he c ons t i t ut i ona l i t y

of r e t r oact i ve l y appl yi ng a pur e l y r e me di a l act whi c h i nc r eas e s

t he j ur i s di c t i on of a c our t . I d. a t 621 ( c iting Unite d St at e s v .

Uni on Pac . R. R. , 98 U. S. ( 8 Ot t o) 569, 607- 608, 25 L. Ed. 143

( 1878) ) . Fur t he r mor e , a ne w s t a t ut e t ha t c ha nge s a r ul e of

pr act i ce appl i e s t o al l pe ndi ng cas e s . Fr ame v . Mar lin Fi r e ar ms
9

Co., I nc . , 514 S. W. 2d 728, 730 ( Te nn. 1974) ; Ross v . Te nne sse e

Far me rs Mut . Ins . Co. , 592 S. W. 2d 897, 898 ( Te nn. App. 1979) .

I n l i ght of t he s e c ons i de r a t i ons , we c onc l ude t ha t t he

a me ndme nt t o T. C. A. § 37- 1- 159 ( 1991) i s pr oc e dur a l r a t he r t ha n

s ubs t a nt i ve . Thi s c our t ha s de c l a r e d t ha t

[ a ] s a ppl i e d t o pr oc e dur a l c ha nge s gove r ni ng

t he r i ght of a ppe a l t he r ul e is tha t, whe r e

due pr ovi s i on ha s be e n ma de f or t he

pr e s e r va tion of e s s e ntia l r i ght s , the

pr oc e dur e f or r e vi e w or t he e xt e nt of r e vi e w

a r e s o f a r wi t hi n t he powe r of t he

l e gi s l a t ur e a s t o pr e c l ude t he r a i s i ng of

que s t i ons of due pr oc e s s wi t h r e s pe c t t o t he

me t hod or pr oc e dur e f or r e vi e w, t he pa r t i e s

e nt i t l e d t o r e vi e w, or t he cha r act e r of

r e vi e w i n t he appe l l a t e cour t .

National Li f e & Ac c i de nt I ns . Co. v . At wood, 194 S. W. 2d 350, 353

( Te nn. App. 1946) . Fi ndi ng t ha t t he a me ndme nt i n que s t i on i s

pr oc e dur a l , howe ve r , doe s not a ut oma t i c a l l y pe r mi t i t s

r e t r oa c t i ve a ppl i c a t i on. Eve n a pr oc e dur a l e na c t me nt ma y not be

a ppl i e d r e t r oa c t i ve l y i n t he f ol l owi ng c i r c ums t a nc e s : whe r e t he

l e gi s l a t ur e ha s ma ni f e s t e d a c ont r a r y i nt e nt i on; whe r e

a ppl i c a t i on of t he ne w l a w woul d i mpa i r a ve s t e d r i ght or

c ont r a c t ua l obl i ga t i on; or whe r e i mme di a t e a ppl i c a t i on of t he

s t a t ut e woul d pr oduc e a n unj us t r e s ul t . Ke e , 852 S. W. 2d a t 228;

Say l or s , 544 S. W. 2d a t 610; a nd Mor f or d, 732 S. W. 2d a t 620. We

a ddr e s s e a c h of t he s e e xc e pt i ons i n t ur n.
10

Cha pt e r 810 of t he Publ i c Ac t s of 1994 of f e r s no

i ndi c a t i on t ha t t he Ge ne r a l As s e mbl y i nt e nde d i t t o a ppl y

pr os pe c t i ve l y onl y. I n t he a bs e nc e of a ny e xpr e s s i on of t ha t

i nt e nt , we c a nnot a s s ume s uc h i nt e nt . Thus , r e t r os pe c t i ve

a ppl i c a t i on of t he a me ndme nt i s not pr ohi bi t e d by l e gi s l a t i ve

i nt e nt . Li ke wi s e , a ppl i c a t i on of t he a me nde d s t a t ut e woul d not

i nf r i nge upon a ny of Mot he r ’ s ve s t e d r i ght s , nor woul d i t i mpa i r

a ny c ont r a c t ua l obl i ga t i ons . Ar t i c l e I , § 20 of t he Te nne s s e e

Cons t i t ut i on pr ohi bi t s t he e na c t me nt of a ny “ r e t r os pe c t i ve l a w,

or l a w i mpa i r i ng t he obl i ga t i ons of c ont r a c t s . ” Thi s pr ovi s i on,

howe ve r , “ pr os c r i be s onl y t hos e l a ws t ha t di ve s t or i mpa i r ve s t e d

s ubs t a nt i ve r i ght s . ” I n r e S. M., Jr . , 1996 WL 140410 a t *4. As

t hi s cour t ha s s t a t e d, t he Ge ne r a l As s e mbl y ma y i mpl e me nt

pr oc e dur a l or r e me di a l c ha nge s i n t he l a w, a nd ma y s ubs t i t ut e one

r e me dy f or a not he r ; t he r e i s no ve s t e d r i ght i n a pa r t i c ul a r

r e me dy. At wood, 194 S. W. 2d a t 353; I n r e S. M., Jr . 1996 WL

140410 a t *4. I n t he c a s e of I n r e S. M., Jr . , t he c our t he l d

t ha t t he s a me ame nde d l a w at i s s ue he r e coul d be appl i e d

r e t r os pe c t i ve l y t o de ny a t r i a l de nov o in c i r c uit c our t to two

pa r e nt s whos e r i ght s ha d be e n t e r mi na t e d. I d. a t *5. Thus ,

Mot he r doe s not ha ve a ve s t e d r i ght i n he r a ve nue of a ppe a l t ha t

woul d be di s t ur be d by a ppl yi ng t he ne w pr oc e dur a l l a w t o he r

cas e .

The thi r d limita tion pr ohi bits the r e t r os pe c tive

a ppl i c a t i on of a pr oc e dur a l c ha nge whe n doi ng s o woul d pr oduc e a n

unj us t r e s ul t . Say l or s , 544 S. W. 2d a t 610. Mot he r a r gue s t ha t
4As not e d ea r l i e r , t h e ef f e c t i v e dat e of t h e ame ndme n t wa s Ap r i l 15

1994. Th e s e c ond hea r i ng wa s hel d on Ap r i l 20, 1994, and t h e t h i r d hea r i n g

t ook pl a c e on Augus t 25 and 26, 1994.

11

t he onl y f a i r r e me dy he r e woul d be f or t hi s c our t t o r e ma nd he r

c a s e t o t he Br a dl e y Count y Ci r c ui t Cour t f or a t r i a l de nov o. 

She i n es s e nce ma i nt a i ns t ha t t he appl i cat i on of t he ame nde d l a w

c a us e d a n unj us t r e s ul t , i n t ha t s he wa s una bl e t o a de qua t e l y

pr e s e r ve t he r e c or d i n j uve ni l e c our t or s ubs e que nt l y de ve l op he r

cas e mor e f ul l y i n ci r c ui t cour t . Si nce t he r e i s no evi de nce of

unf a i r pr e j udi c e , we di s a gr e e wi t h he r c ont e nt i on. Mot he r ha s

not s ubmi t t e d a ny a f f i da vi t s or ot he r e vi de nc e c l e a r l y

de mons t r a t i ng t ha t s he woul d ha ve c onduc t e d he r s e l f di f f e r e nt l y

dur i ng t he he a r i ngs ha d s he a nt i c i pa t e d a di r e c t a ppe a l t o t hi s

c our t . She a r gue s t ha t s he ha s be e n pr e j udi c e d by t he l a c k of a

t r a ns c r i pt of t he he a r i ngs ; howe ve r , s he ha s s ubmi t t e d, wi t hout

obj e c t i on f r om oppos i ng c ouns e l , a s t a t e me nt of t he e vi de nc e t ha t

e nc ompa s s e s t he t hr e e he a r i ngs i n que s t i on. Fur t he r mor e , s he

f a i l e d t o r e t a i n a c our t r e por t e r f or t he s e c ond a nd t hi r d

hear i ngs , whi c h we r e he l d af t e r t he ef f ect i ve da t e of t he

a me ndme nt .

4

 Mot he r ha d s uf f i c i e nt not i c e of t he c ha nge i n

a ppe l l a t e pr ocedur e , and of t he i nc r eas e d s i gni f i cance of a

he a r i ng i n j uve ni l e c our t . See I n r e S. M., Jr . , 1996 WL 140410

a t *5. She a nd he r a t t or ne y we r e c ha r ge d wi t h knowl e dge of t he

a me ndme nt t o T. C. A. § 37- 1- 159 ( 1991) . The r e f or e , we f i nd t ha t

a ppl i c a t i on of t he a me nde d s t a t ut e di d not unj us t l y l i mi t he r

a bi l i t y t o pr e s e nt he r c a s e i n j uve ni l e c our t , or t o obt a i n

r e vi e w of t ha t c our t ’ s de c i s i on on a ppe a l . I d. We hol d t ha t s he

i s not e ntitle d to a tr i a l de nov o i n c i r c ui t c our t , unde r t he
5We not e , i n pas s i ng, t h a t t h e per t i n e n t s e c t i ons of t h e s t a t u t e have

r e c e n t l y bee n t h e s ubj e c t of s ubs t a n t i a l ame ndme n t . T. C. A. §§ 37- 1 - 147 and -

148 ( Supp. 1995) .

6

T.C.A. § 37-1-148 (1991) provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

An or d e r t e r mi n a t i ng t h e par e n t a l r i ght s of a pa r e n t

t e r mi n a t e s al l of s u c h par e n t ’ s r i ght s and obl i g a t i ons

wi t h r espect t o t h e ch i l d an d o f t h e ch i l d t o such

p a r e n t ar i s i ng f r o m t h e par e n t a l r e l a t i ons h i p . . . .

12

l a ngua ge of T. C. A. § 37- 1- 159 ( Supp. 1995) , a s a me nde d e f f e c t i ve

Apr i l 15, 1994. He r a ppe a l i s pr ope r l y be f or e us .

I V

Mot he r ’ s s e c ond i s s ue r a i s e s t he que s t i on of whe t he r

t he i nt e r ve ni ng pe t i t i on f i l e d by t he Ga r dne r s c ompl i e s wi t h t he

r e qui r e me nt s of T. C. A. § 37- 1- 147( a ) ( 1991) .

5

 The s t a t ut e in

e f f e c t a t t he t i me of t he Ga r dne r s ’ Pe t i t i on pr ovi de d i n

pe r t i ne nt pa r t :

The pe tition to te r mi na t e pa r e nt a l r i ght s

s ha l l c ompl y wi t h § 37- 1- 121 a nd s t a t e

c l e a r l y t ha t a n or de r f or t e r mi na t i on of

pa r e nt a l r i ght s i s r e que s t e d a nd t ha t t he

e f f ect t he r e of wi l l be as s t a t e d i n t he f i r s t

s e nt e nc e of § 37- 1- 148. 6

Mot he r c ont e nds t ha t t he Ga r dne r s ’ Pe t i t i on di d not c ompl y wi t h

t hi s pr ovi s i on, a nd t ha t i t t he r e f or e f a i l e d t o put he r on not i c e

t ha t a t e r mi na t i on of he r pa r e nt a l r i ght s wa s be i ng s ought . We

di s a gr ee.
13

The Ga r dne r s i n t he i r pe t i t i on s e t f or t h t he f ol l owi ng

i n one of t he i r pr a ye r s f or r e l i e f :

Tha t upon he a r i ng of t hi s c a us e , t ha t t he

Cour t woul d t e r mi na t e t he pa r e nt a l r i ght s of

bot h na t ur a l pa r e nt s of J ohn De f r i e c e a nd

Ka t i e De f r i ece.

The Pe t i t i on ma ke s no ot he r me nt i on of a t e r mi na t i on of Mot he r ’ s

pa r e nt a l r i ght s . Ne ve r t he l e s s , we be l i e ve t ha t t he pr a ye r

s ubs t a nt i a l l y c ompl i e s wi t h T. C. A. § 37- 1- 147( a ) ( 1991) . I n

r e vi e wi ng t he a de qua c y of pa r t i c ul a r pl e a di ngs , we gi ve e f f e c t t o

t he i r s ubs t a nc e r a t he r t ha n t he i r f or m a nd t e r mi nol ogy. Br own v .

Ci t y of Manc he s t e r , 722 S. W. 2d 394, 397 ( Te nn. App. 1986) ; Usre y

v . Le wi s , 553 S. W. 2d 612, 614 ( Te nn. App. 1977) . We f i nd t ha t

t he s ubs t a nc e of t he Pe t i t i on s uf f i c e d t o put Mot he r on not i c e

t ha t t he Ga r dne r s we r e s eeki ng a t e r mi na t i on of he r pa r e nt a l

r i ght s .

We al s o not e t ha t t he r ecor d r e veal s t ha t Mot he r f a i l e d

t o obj e c t , pr i or t o t hi s a ppe a l , t o a ny de f i c i e nc y i n t he

pl e a di ngs . The pr a ye r i n t he Pe t i t i on pr ovi de d s uf f i c i e nt not i c e

t o obl i ga t e he r t o obj e c t t o a ny t e c hni c a l nonc ompl i a nc e wi t h t he

s t a t ut e . She ha d a mpl e oppor t uni t y t o move f or a di s mi s s a l or

mor e de f i nite s t a t eme nt, ye t s he f a ile d to do s o. It is we lls e ttle d tha t is s ue s not r a i s e d a t tr i a l ma y not be r a i s e d f or the

f i r s t t i me on a ppe a l. Si mps on v . Fr ontie r Community Cr e di t

Uni on, 810 S. W. 2d 147, 153 ( Te nn. 1991) ; Lawr e nce v. St anf or d,
14

655 S. W. 2d 927, 929 ( Te nn. 1983) . Ac c or di ngl y, we f i nd t ha t

Mot he r ’ s s e c ond i s s ue i s wi t hout me r i t .

V

Mot he r ’ s t hi r d i s s ue pr e s e nt s t he que s t i on of whe t he r

t he t r i a l c our t ’ s t e r mi na t i on of he r pa r e nt a l r i ght s i s s uppor t e d

by c l e a r a nd c onvi nc i ng e vi de nc e . Cour t s ha ve l ong r e c ogni z e d

t he f unda me nt a l r i ght of pa r e nt s t o t he c a r e , c us t ody, a nd

c ont r ol of t he i r c hi l dr e n. I n re Dr i nnon, 776 S. W. 2d 96, 97

( Te nn. App. 1988) ( c i t i ng St anl e y v . I llinoi s , 405 U. S. 645, 92

S. Ct . 1208, 31 L. Ed. 2d 551 ( 1972) ) ; howe ve r , pa r e nt a l r i ght s a r e

not abs ol ut e and ma y be t e r mi na t e d i f t he r e i s cl ear and

c onvi nc i ng e vi de nc e j us t i f yi ng s uc h t e r mi na t i on. I n re Dr i nnon,

776 S. W. 2d a t 97 ( c i t i ng Sant os ky v . Kr ame r , 455 U. S. 745, 102

S. Ct . 1388, 71 L. Ed. 2d 599 ( 1982) ) . The r e f or e , pur s ua nt t o

T. C. A. § 37- 1- 147( d) ( 1) ( 1991) , we mus t de t e r mi ne whe t he r t he

t r i a l c our t pr ope r l y f ound c l e a r a nd c onvi nc i ng e vi de nc e : ( 1)

t ha t J ohn ha d be e n r e move d f r om Mot he r ’ s c us t ody f or a t l e a s t one

ye a r ; ( 2) t ha t t he c ondi t i ons whi c h l e d t o t he r e mova l , or ot he r

s i mi l a r c ondi t i ons t ha t woul d s ubj e c t J ohn t o f ur t he r a bus e or

ne gl e c t, s till e xi s t; ( 3) tha t the r e is little c ha nc e tha t the s e

c ondi t i ons wi l l s oon be r e me di e d; ( 4) t ha t c ont i nui ng Mot he r ’ s

r e l a t i ons hi p wi t h J ohn wi l l gr e a t l y di mi ni s h hi s c ha nc e s of e a r l y

i nt e gr a t i on i nt o a s t a bl e a nd pe r ma ne nt home ; a nd ( 5) t ha t

t e r mi na t i on of Mot he r ’ s pa r e nt a l r i ght s i s i n J ohn’ s be s t

i nt e r e s t s. Te nne s s ee De pt . Of Human Se r v i ces v. Ri l e y , 689
15

S. W. 2d 164, 165 ( Te nn. App. 1984) ; I n r e S. M., Jr . , 1996 WL

140410 a t *8. Ea c h of t he s e e l e me nt s mus t be f ound by c l e a r a nd

c onvi nc i ng e vi de nc e . Rile y a t 165.

Mot he r c onc e de s t ha t J ohn ha s be e n r e move d f r om he r

c us t ody f or mor e t ha n one ye a r . Wi t h r e ga r d t o t he s e c ond a nd

t hi r d c r i t e r i a , whi c h i nvol ve t he c ondi t i ons t ha t l e d t o J ohn’ s

r e mova l f r om Mot he r ’ s c us t ody, t he e vi de nc e i s l e s s c e r t a i n.

The r e c l e a r l y i s e vi de nc e t ha t Mot he r ha s not pr ovi de d J ohn wi t h

a s ui t a bl e home . The f os t e r car e pl a n i ndi cat e s t ha t Mot he r ha d

pr obl e ms wi t h dr ugs a nd a l c ohol . The t r i a l c our t f ound J ohn t o

be de pe nde nt a nd ne gl e c t e d. I n a ddi t i on, t he r e c or d c ont a i ns

e vi de nc e t ha t Mot he r wa s i nvol ve d wi t h s e ve r a l di f f e r e nt me n

f ol l owi ng he r di vor c e f r om J ohn’ s na t ur a l f a t he r . She c ha nge d

j obs a nd r e s i de nc e s qui t e f r e que nt l y, c ont r i but i ng t o t he l a c k of

s t a bility in J ohn’ s lif e . The r e c or ds of DHS a l s o r e f l e c t he r

l a c k of pr ogr e s s a t t i me s t owa r d t he goa l s of t he f os t e r c a r e

pl a n.

The or de r of t he t r i a l c our t gr a nt i ng c us t ody of J ohn

t o t he Ga r dne r s s t a t e s t ha t Mot he r ha d ma de no s ubs t a nt i a l

i mpr ove me nt in he r c i r c ums t a nc e s . At the time it te r mi na t e d

Mot he r ’ s pa r e nt a l r i ght s , t he t r i a l c our t f ound t ha t s he ha d

de mons t r a t e d a “monume nt a l ” l ack of s t a bi l i t y, as we l l as an 

i na bi l i t y t o pr ovi de f or he r c hi l dr e n. I n a c c or da nc e wi t h t he

f our t h a nd f i f t h c r i t e r i a l i s t e d a bove , t he c our t we nt on t o f i nd

t ha t a t e r mi na t i on of Mot he r ’ s pa r e nt a l r i ght s t o J ohn wa s i n hi s
16

be s t i nt e r e s t a nd woul d gr e a t l y e nha nc e hi s oppor t uni t y f or

i nt e gr a t i on i nt o a s t a bl e , pe r ma ne nt home .

On t he ot he r ha nd, t he r e c or d r e f l e c t s s ome e vi de nc e of

Mot he r ’ s e f f or t s t owa r d i mpr ove me nt . She a t t e nde d c ouns e l i ng

s e s s i ons a nd c ompl e t e d pa r e nt i ng c l a s s e s . Si nc e t he i ni t i a l

pl a c e me nt of he r c hi l dr e n, t he r e ha ve be e n no f ur t he r a l l e ga t i ons

of dr ug or a l c ohol a bus e by Mot he r . I n f a c t , t he DHS r e por t s

i ndi c a t e t ha t s he ha s ma de s ome pr ogr e s s t owa r d a ba t i ng t he

c ondi t i ons t ha t ne c e s s i t a t e d pl a c e me nt of he r c hi l dr e n i n t he

car e of ot he r s . She ha s compl e t e d a Vocat i ona l Re ha bi l i t a t i on

pr ogr a m, a nd a t t he t i me t ha t he r pa r e nt a l r i ght s we r e

t e r mi na t e d, s he wa s wor ki ng f or t y hour s a we e k a t a ne w j ob.

Mot he r i s a l s o i nvol ve d i n a mor e s t a bl e r e l a t i ons hi p, wi t h

Ge or ge Bl ackwe l l , a ma n s he ha s been s eei ng f or near l y a year .

Mr . Bl ackwe l l ha s at t e nde d and compl e t e d pa r e nt i ng cl a s s e s wi t h

he r . He r r e s i de nt i a l si t ua t i on ha s s t a bi l i z e d s ome wha t, a s s he

ha s be e n l i vi ng wi t h Mr . Bl a c kwe l l i n a t wo- be dr oom t r a i l e r

s uppl i e d by hi s e mpl oye r .

Gi ve n t he f or e goi ng, we c a nnot c onc l ude t ha t t he r e i s

c l e ar and c onv i nc i ng evi de nce t ha t al l of t he r e qui r e me nt s of

T. C. A. § 37- 1- 147( d) ( 1) ( 1991) we r e me t s o a s t o j us t i f y a

t e r mi na t i on of Mot he r ’ s pa r e nt a l r i ght s . The c l e a r a nd

c onvi nc i ng s t a nda r d i mpos e s a he i ght e ne d bur de n on t hos e s e e ki ng

t o te r mi na t e the r i ght s of a na t ur a l pa r e nt. To me e t thi s
17

s t a nda r d, a pa r t y mus t go be yond t he me r e t hr e s hol d of a

pr e ponde r a nc e of t he e vi de nc e :

Cl ear and convi nc i ng evi de nce el i mi na t e s any

s e r i ous or s ubs t a nt i a l doubt c onc e r ni ng t he

c or r e c t ne s s of t he c onc l us i ons t o be dr a wn

f r om t he e vi de nc e . I t s houl d pr oduc e i n t he

f a c t - fi nde r’s mi nd a fi r m be l i e f or

c onvi c t i on wi t h r e ga r d t o t he t r ut h of t he

a l l e ga t i ons s ought t o be e s t a bl i s he d.

O’ Dani e l v . Me s s i e r , 905 S. W. 2d 182, 188 ( Te nn. App. 1995)

( c i t a t i ons omi t t e d) . The e vi de nc e i n t hi s c a s e s i mpl y doe s not

r i s e t o s uc h a l e ve l . See I n re Dr i nnon, 776 S. W. 2d a t 100.

We hol d t ha t t he t r i a l c our t e r r e d i n f i ndi ng t ha t t he

e vi de nc e e s t a bl i s he d t he e l e me nt s of T. C. A. § 37- 1- 147( d) ( 1)

( 1991) by c l e a r a nd c onvi nc i ng e vi de nc e . We a c knowl e dge t ha t our

de c i s i on i s i n pa r t i nf l ue nc e d by e vi de nc e of a par t i al

i mpr ove me nt i n Mot he r ’ s a bi l i t y t o pr ovi de a s t a bl e , c a r i ng

e nvi r onme nt f or J ohn. We ha s t e n t o a dd, howe ve r , t ha t a s f a r a s

t he r e c or d now s t a nds , t he e vi de nc e c l e a r l y s uppor t s t he

c onc l us i on t ha t J ohn’ s c us t ody s houl d s t a y wi t h t he Ga r dne r s .

Si nc e we a r e not pr i vy t o wha t ha s oc c ur r e d s i nc e t he l a s t

he a r i ng da t e , Augus t 26, 1994, we e xpr e s s a bs ol ut e l y no opi ni on

a s t o whe t he r or whe n J ohn’ s c us t ody s houl d be r e t ur ne d t o

Mot he r . In f a c t, the c or r e c t out c ome of thi s litiga tion ma y

s till invol ve the te r mi na tion of Mot he r ’ s pa r e nt a l r i ght s ;

howe ve r , a ny s uc h de t e r mi na t i on mus t be ba s e d upon c l e a r a nd

c onvi nc i ng e vi de nc e t ha t e a c h r e qui r e me nt f or t e r mi na t i on i n
T. C. A. § 37- 1- 147( d) ( 1) ( 1991) ha s be e n me t . We l e a ve t ha t

de c i s i on t o t he J uve ni l e Cour t upon r e ma nd of t hi s c a us e .

The j udgme nt of t he t r i a l c our t i s va c a t e d. Cos t s on

a ppeal ar e as s e s s e d aga i ns t t he appe l l ee. Thi s cas 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 f ur t he r pr oc e e di ngs a s ma y be

ne c e s s a r y, c ons i s t e nt wi t h t hi s opi ni on.

_________________________

Cha r l e s D. Sus a no, J r ., J .

CONCUR:

________________________

Hous t on M. Godda r d, P. J .

________________________

He r s c he l P. Fr a nks , J .
19

FILED

October 4, 1996

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate Court Clerk

I N THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

EASTERN SECTI ON

STATE OF TENNESSEE )

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVI CES )

 )

Pe t i t i one r - Appe l l e e , )

 )

a nd )

 )

 )

WI LLI AM D. GARDNER a nd )

J OANN GARDNER, )

 )

I nt e r ve ni ng )

Pe t i t i one r s - Appe l l e e s , ) BRADLEY COUNTY J UVENI LE COURT 

 ) C/ A NO. 03A01- 9604- J V- 00150

 )

 )

v. ) 

 )

 )

 )

DANA D. DEFRI ECE, )

 )

Re s ponde nt - Appe l l a nt . )

 )

I N THE MATTER OF: )

 ) 

J OHN DEFRI ECE, ) 

 a mi nor . ) 

 CONCURRI NG OPI NI ON

I c onc ur i n t he ma j or i t y opi ni on t ha t not a l l of t he

c i r c ums t a nces necess a r y t o t e r mi na t e pa r e nt a l r i ght s ha ve been

s hown by c l e a r a nd c onvi nc i ng e vi de nc e .

I wr i t e s e pa r a t e l y t o e mpha s i z e t ha t I do not - - a nd I a m

s ur e t he ma j or i t y of t he me mbe r s of t he Cour t do not - - c ondone t he

unma r r i e d Mot he r l i vi ng wi t h Mr . Bl a c kwe l l , a nd s ugge s t t ha t
20

c ont i nua nc e of s uc h a r e l a t i ons hi p doe s not a dva nc e he r goa l t o

be r e uni t e d wi t h he r c hi l d.

_______________________________

Hous t on M. Godda r d, P. J .