Judge David D. Wolfe addressed a divorce case in which the petitioner, Amanda Thomas, presented evidence and sworn counsel statements that the respondent had engaged in surveillance and placed a tracking device on the petitioner’s vehicle. Petitioner’s counsel said she had photographic and video evidence and intended to turn the device over to the District Attorney General’s Office for possible prosecution. The court recognized potential criminal liability arising from the alleged conduct and granted a short continuance to allow defense counsel to consult with his client and assess criminal exposure.

Later in the docket the parties returned with an agreement. The court accepted a stipulated divorce decree and approved the terms announced on the record. The written and oral terms include a permanent restraining/no-contact order prohibiting the respondent from stalking, surveilling, photographing, tracking, recording, posting about, or contacting Amanda Thomas, her employer, friends, or family; a prohibition on disseminating any photographs or recordings allegedly obtained; awarding specified personal property to each party (including transfer of a Ford F-150 to the respondent free and clear; VIN to be specified in the order); and a reimbursement payment of $1,482.19 to the petitioner for insurance premiums the petitioner had paid on the respondent’s vehicle from August 2023 through February 2025.

The court emphasized the legal limits on recording and surveillance, stating that “those things don't apply” during divorce and observing that Tennessee criminal statutes make some of the alleged acts illegal. Judge Wolfe also made clear the court’s intent to protect the petitioner by issuing a restraining order tailored to bar acts that could be criminal and to prevent dissemination of any unlawfully obtained images. Pleading and evidentiary issues were discussed on the record; the petitioner’s counsel said she would submit the device and evidence to prosecutors.

The court instructed counsel that the agreement becomes an order effective immediately when announced on the record and warned the respondent that dissemination of any illegally obtained images or recordings could result in contempt and jail time for violations. The court directed counsel to draw and submit a written order that incorporates the stipulation and the restraining provisions and to coordinate on the specific property descriptions and VINs to be inserted.

Ending: The court approved the parties' stipulation as a final decree of divorce effective on the record, entered a permanent no-contact/restraining order with specific prohibitions on surveillance and dissemination of images, and required counsel to file the written order. The petitioner’s counsel indicated she would provide the evidence to the District Attorney General’s Office for possible criminal prosecution.