LORENZO REED, SR.
Session January 10, 2018
father filed a petition to modify his child support
obligation based on a reduction in income. Following a trial,
the court determined that there was a significant variance
between the Tennessee Child Support Guidelines and the amount
of support ordered, and the court reduced the father's
child support obligation. Discerning no error, we affirm.
R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery
Akende-Reed, Fairview, Tennessee, appellant, pro se.
Lorenzo Reed, Sr., Ashburn, Virginia, appellee, pro se.
Neal McBrayer, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in
which Frank G. Clement Jr., P.J., M.S., and Richard H.
Dinkins, J., joined.
NEAL McBRAYER, JUDGE
Reed, Sr. and Helen Akende-Reed married in Abuja, Nigeria, in
April 2009. They divorced in March 2013; the marriage
produced two children.
Reed's child support obligation varied during the course
of this litigation. As of August 2016, a special master found
Mr. Reed's gross monthly income to be $12, 062.87,
resulting in a child support obligation of $2, 227 per month.
But because Mr. Reed owed $9, 325.16 in back child support,
the special master determined that "his total child
support [would also include] $75.00 for arrearage payments
for a total of [$]2, 303.00 per month." The Chancery
Court for Montgomery County, Tennessee, confirmed the special
master's report by order of September 8, 2016.
October 4, 2016, Mr. Reed filed a petition to reduce child
support, alleging a material change in circumstances because
of "a substantial reduction in his pay." According
to the statement of the evidence, the following took place at
trial on Mr. Reed's petition:
1. . . . Only the Parties provided testimony, [sic] and also
submitted documentation as to income.
[Mr. Reed] testified that, after the Special Master's
hearing, his job had changed and he had been relocated to a
position that did not include housing and other allowances
that he had previously received. He provided his current pay
statements that included year to date earnings, showing that
his income is $7536.00 per month and that such amount was in
effect at the time he filed his Petition for Modification on
October 4, 2016.
January 10, 2017, the trial court entered an order finding
Mr. Reed's gross monthly income to be $7, 536 and Ms.
Akende-Reed's gross monthly income to be $2, 745. After
allowing certain expense deductions, the court reduced Mr.
Reed's child support obligation from $2, 227 to $1, 580
per month, "a reduction exceeding 15%, "
retroactive to the date of the filing of his petition.
Akende-Reed filed an "Objection to Child Support Order,
" which the court treated as a motion to alter or amend.
Because the January 10 order did not set forth the arrearage
or method of payment, the court entered another order finding
that, after giving credit for all payments Mr. Reed had made
since August 2016, the arrearage through February 2017 was
$9, 326.16, to be paid at an additional $59.78 per month. The
court, however, rejected Ms. ...