Judge David D. Wolfe issued a temporary parenting and financial order in the divorce hearing of Deanna Lee Dodd and Brian Webster Dodd on Oct. 12, 2025, keeping the couple's three younger children in the marital residence and continuing the parties' existing split-week schedule while child support and shared household obligations are calculated.

The judge said the day-to-day needs and schooling of the children weighed in favor of maintaining stability. "A temporary hearing is designed to, keep, you know, life and limb together until you can get to a final hearing," Wolfe said from the bench.

The temporary order designates Deanna Lee Dodd, the mother, as the primary residential parent for custody and keeps the current arrangement in place: the father will continue with weekend time (three 24-hour periods, generally Friday afternoon through Sunday evening) while the mother will retain weekday residential responsibility (four 24-hour periods). The judge said that arrangement is less disruptive to the children's school and routines than switching to a week-on/week-off schedule now.

Wolfe instructed the parties to calculate child support under the Tennessee child support guidelines and ordered that the father's guideline amount be paid to the mother. He also directed the parties to place funds into a joint account for household bills and utilities on a pro rata basis tied to each parent's income while the temporary arrangement is in effect. The judge said the parties' incomes presented at the hearing would be used in the support calculation: Deanna Lee Dodd testified she earns about $15 an hour, and Brian Webster Dodd's recent pay stubs showed higher earnings consistent with his testimony of roughly $39 per hour.

The court also ordered that the children remain in the marital residence during the pendency of the divorce, noting that neither party owns the home; the property is owned by the father's mother. "I am ordering that the current situation that they have agreed upon will continue with the weekends with the father and the weekdays during the week with the mother," Wolfe said. He declined to award exclusive possession of the house to either spouse because the owner is not a party to the case.

On safety, privacy and household access, the judge allowed the existing exterior ring floodlight camera to remain but banned additional interior cameras: "Other than the ring camera and the floodlight, there will be no other cameras installed in the interior of this home," he said. Wolfe also admonished both parents to avoid involving or influencing children in the parents' disputes and warned that further attempts to influence children’s testimony or attitudes could lead to contempt sanctions. In chambers earlier, he told a parent, "If you do that again, I'm gonna put you in jail," after hearing testimony that a parent had discussed testimony with a child.

The judge left the door open for revisiting temporary financial support if the child support and pro rata household contributions do not cover the mother's reasonable needs. He said the family should expect further adjustment at the final divorce hearing and that any claims about pre-marital or marital debts not specifically addressed temporarily will be revisited at a final accounting.

The hearing record includes testimony from both parents, the mother describing household duties and earnings, and the father describing his work schedule and care he provides during his time with the children. The court heard testimony from the couple's 12-year-old son, who expressed a preference for substantial time with both parents, but the judge explained that a child's stated preference is only one factor among several and that the children's stability and schooling were paramount in the temporary decision.

Wolfe set the temporary orders to remain in place until further court proceedings. He encouraged the parents to reduce conflict, to keep the children out of disputes and to work toward cooperative co-parenting during the pendency of the case.