## Facts

- Jerry Clyde Nix (father) and Amy Nix Cantrell (mother) divorced in Mississippi and had one child, Jacy Marie Nix (Jacy).
- Mississippi custody orders designated the father as Jacy’s primary residential parent; the mother had visitation, and the custody history referenced the mother’s mental health problems.
- When Jacy was 14, the father delivered her to the mother for visitation, expecting Jacy would then travel for a vacation.
- Instead, without notifying the father, the mother took Jacy and Jacy’s 18-year-old boyfriend to the Juvenile Court for McNairy County, Tennessee, seeking permission for them to marry.
- At the courthouse, the mother signed a consent affidavit as Jacy’s parent, and the juvenile court entered an order waiving the age limitation and authorizing issuance of a marriage license.
- Relying on that order, Jacy and her boyfriend obtained a Tennessee marriage license and married.
- After learning of the marriage, the father filed a motion in the same juvenile court to set aside the prior order that authorized the marriage.
- Following a hearing, the juvenile court set aside its earlier order and further concluded that setting aside the authorization rendered the marriage void.
- The mother appealed, arguing that the juvenile court should not have granted relief from the earlier order and should not have declared the marriage void.

## Issues

1. Whether the juvenile court abused its discretion by granting relief under Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 60.02 and setting aside its prior ex parte order authorizing the 14-year-old’s marriage.
2. Whether, after the authorization order was vacated, the juvenile court correctly determined that the underage marriage was void.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Tennessee affirmed.
- The court held the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in setting aside the earlier order authorizing the marriage under Rule 60.02.
- The court also upheld the juvenile court’s conclusion that vacating the authorization order meant the marriage lacked the required legal basis and was therefore void.

## Legal Principles

- A trial court’s ruling on a Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 60.02 motion is reviewed for abuse of discretion; an appellate court will not reverse merely because it might have decided differently.
- Rule 60.02 permits a court to grant relief from a final order for reasons such as mistake, fraud, or other reasons justifying relief, and it gives trial courts broad discretion to correct an order entered on an incomplete or mistaken factual showing.
- When an underage marriage depends on parental consent and/or a court order authorizing the marriage, a material omission about custody or parental authority can justify relief from an authorization order obtained without notice to the other parent.
- Where the parent with primary custodial authority was not notified and did not consent, and the court’s authorization order is later set aside, the marriage may be treated as void because the statutory prerequisites for a minor’s marriage are no longer satisfied.

## Conclusion

In *In re J.M.N.*, the Tennessee Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court’s decision to set aside an ex parte order that had allowed a 14-year-old to marry without notice to her father, the primary residential parent under prior Mississippi custody orders, and it agreed that once the authorization order was vacated, the marriage was void.


In re J.M.N., No. W2007-00615-COA-R3-JV (2008)