Hodge v. Crane

382 S.W.3d 325 (2012)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P and D met High School. They were both sixteen years old and in the eleventh grade. D had already given birth to a daughter who was almost one year old. They dated and had sex. D had sexual relations with both a Mr. Hay and d during the period when her son was conceived. D told P that she believed she was pregnant. Upon confirmation, P sought reassurance from D and asked if she was sure that he was the child's father. D responded that she was sure that he was the child's father and that the child could be no one else's. Based on these assurances, P proposed marriage, and they were married on December 20, 1991. Ms. Hodge gave birth to a son named Kyle Chandler Craig on June 11, 1992. In November 2000, D filed a complaint in the Chancery Court seeking a divorce on the ground of irreconcilable differences. The trial court entered a final divorce decree. The marital dissolution agreement provided that P and D would have joint custody of the children and that D would be the primary residential parent. D received visitation and was ordered to pay $250 per week in child support for both children and to provide medical insurance for the children. In January 2002, D married Mr. Hodge. P married a Ms. West in June 2003. In October 2003, P requested the trial court to decrease the amount of his child support because the move to Georgia had required him to take a lower paying job. The trial court reduced child support to $180 per week and relieving P of the responsibility to provide medical insurance for the children. The son expressed a desire to live with P and his new family. The trial court approved a modified parenting plan designating P as Kyle's primary residential parent and D as her daughter's primary residential parent. Following the entry of this order, D began paying child support to P. During 2006 P began to question whether he was Kyle's biological father. In 2007, P surreptitiously obtained a DNA sample and submitted the sample for testing. The test confirmed that P was not Kyle's biological father. In March 2007, after Kyle expressed a desire to live with D, P decided to tell D and Kyle about the test. In April 2007, D filed a pro se petition requesting custody of Kyle, a court-ordered blood test, and a modification of the order requiring her to pay child support. P filed a 'counter-petition' for the misrepresentation seeking $150,000 in compensatory damages and $150,000 in punitive damages. D denied she had ever been asked about who was the father. The trial court observed that D's 'credibility . . . leaves much to be desired.' The trial court concluded that D 'purposely defrauded P into believing Kyle was his child, knowing she had sexual relations with Joey Hay at the time and a count on one's fingers would have revealed Joey Hay could be the father.' P was awarded $23,030.24, representing the total child support paid, $2,214.20, representing medical expenses and insurance premiums paid,' and $1,181.75 'for TRH Health Plans.' The court also awarded P $100,000.00 'for the emotional distress suffered' and $8,451.71 in attorney's fees. On appeal, the court reversed the damage award for child support, medical expenses, and insurance premiums because it amounted to retroactive modification of the earlier child support order. noneconomic damages could not be awarded for a misrepresentation claim. It vacated the award of attorney's fees because it had reversed all the other compensatory damage awards. P appealed.