Pippin v. Pippin

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that “[e]xisting custody arrangements are favored since children thrive in stable environments”
• explaining that “if no material change in circumstance has been proven, 6 the . . . court ‘is not required to make a best interests determination and must deny the request for a change of custody’” (quoting Caudill v. Foley, 21 S.W.3d 203, 213 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999))
• error in evidentiary ruling was harmless when the opposing party suffered no prejudice

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).