IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

Assigned November 29, 2010

IN RE: KIERSTEN CIERRA BURCHETTE 

Appeal from the Juvenile Court for Cocke County

No. 03799 A. Benjamin Strand, Jr., Judge

No. E2010-02132-COA-R3-JV - FIELD NOVEMBER 29,2010

This lawsuit involves whether custody of Kiersten Cierra Burchette (the “Child”) should be

changed from Carey A. Bible (“Mother”) to Chadwick J. Burchette (“Father”). Father filed

an emergency petition seeking custody. Father claimed, among other things, that the Child

was being sexually abused by Mother’s boyfriend. Although the emergency petition

eventually was dismissed, the Juvenile Court did designate Father as the Child’s primary

residential parent. The Juvenile Court, however, specifically reserved ruling on who should

pay certain medical expenses as well as a bill for the deposition of Father’s private

investigator. The Juvenile Court also reserved ruling on all child support issues. Mother

appeals. We dismiss this appeal for lack of a final judgment.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Appeal Dismissed

D. MICHAEL SWINEY, J., HERSCHEL P. FRANKS, P.J., and JOHN W. MCCLARTY, J.

Scott Justice, Jefferson City, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Carey A. Bible.

Rebecca D. Slone, Dandridge, Tennessee, for the Appellee, Chadwick J. Burchette.
MEMORANDUM OPINION

1

Background

This lawsuit involves which parentshould be designated as primary residential

parent of the Child. In September 2007, Father filed a petition for modification claiming

there had been a material change in circumstances and that it was in the Child’s best interest

for him to be designated as the Child’s primary residential parent. While the petition was

pending, Mother graduated from nursing school and filed a petition seeking to relocate with

the Child to Kingsport where Mother had found employment.

In August 2009, an ex parte order was entered temporarily transferring custody

of the Child to Father based on allegations of dependency and neglect. Father asserted that

the Child had been fondled by Mother’s boyfriend, Preston Salley. A guardian ad litem was

appointed on the Child’s behalf, and Mother was ordered not to allow Preston Salley around

the Child.

A hearing was held in December 2009, following which the Juvenile Court

dismissed Father’s emergency petition for custody. The Juvenile Court also determined that

the matter should proceed with “both parties . . . [being] allowed to proceed in a custody case

to determine which parent would be the primary residential parent.” The Juvenile Court

further ruled that, in the meantime, Father would remain the primary residential parent. The

no-contact order between Preston Salley and the Child remained in effect.

Following another hearing, in August 2010 the Juvenile Court determined that

Father should be designated as the Child’s primary residential parent and set forth Mother’s

co-parenting time. Various issues were reserved for later ruling, including payment of

medical expenses and a bill for the deposition of Father’s private investigator. The Juvenile

Court also reserved all child support issues. Mother appeals.

Rule 10 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals provides: “This Court, with the concurrence of all

1

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 any unrelated case.”

-2-
Discussion

The Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure define an appeal as of right from

a final judgment as follows:

In civil actions every final judgment entered by a trial court from

which an appeal lies to the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals

is appealable as of right. Except as otherwise permitted in Rule

9 and in Rule 54.02 Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure, if

multiple parties or multiple claims for relief are involved in an

action, any order that adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the

rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties is not

enforceable or appealable and is subject to revision at any time

before entry of a final judgment adjudicating all the claims,

rights, and liabilities of all parties.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3(a). The parties to this appeal have not filed an application for an

interlocutory appeal pursuant to Rules 9 or 10 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, and the

order appealed from the Juvenile Court has not otherwise been made final.

A final judgment is “one that resolves all the issues in the case, ‘leaving

nothing else for the trial court to do.’” In re Estate of Henderson, 121 S.W.3d 643, 645

(Tenn. 2003) (quoting State ex rel. McAllister v. Goode, 968 S.W.2d 834, 840 (Tenn. Ct.

App. 1997)). “[A]ny trial court order that adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights

and liabilities of fewer than all the parties is not final or appealable as of right.” State ex rel.

Garrison v. Scobey, No. W2007-02367-C0A-R3-JV, 2008 WL 4648359, at *5 (Tenn. Ct.

App. Oct. 22, 2008). This Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate an

appeal if there is no final judgment. The Tennessee Supreme Court has recognized that

“[u]nless an appeal from an interlocutory order is provided by the rules or by statute,

appellate courts have jurisdiction over final judgments only.” Bayberry Assocs. v. Jones, 783

S.W.2d 553, 559 (Tenn. 1990). See also Ruff v. Raleigh Assembly of God Church, Inc., 241

S.W.3d 876, 877 at n.1 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007).

In the present case, the Juvenile Court specifically reserved ruling on several

issues, including child support. Because the order appealed from is not a final judgment, this

Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction, and this appeal must be dismissed.

-3-
Conclusion

This appeal is dismissed, and this cause is remanded to the Juvenile Court for

Cocke County for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion and for collection of the

costs below. Costs on appeal are taxed to the Appellant, Carey A. Bible, and her surety, for

which execution may issue, if necessary.

PER CURIAM

-4-