Benson v. Loffelmacher
2012 SD 75
S.D.2012Background
- Brent Benson and Michelle Loffelmacher had a child, A.L., out of wedlock; paternity was confirmed on December 8, 2004.
- Brent had limited involvement with A.L. through 2007 while living in Minnesota, then moved to Dickinson, North Dakota.
- Early agreements provided Michelle with physical custody and Brent with visitation one week every other month at Brent’s mother’s home; arrangements continued through 2010.
- Brent petitioned in 2010 for a change of custody with an accompanying emergency change request; November 2010 hearing denied the emergency request and a custody evaluation was ordered.
- March 2011: circuit court awarded interim custody to Brent, citing Michelle’s mental health issues and exposure of A.L. to three live-in boyfriends; June 2011 evaluator Collins issued a report; August 2011 hearing resulted in Brent obtaining physical custody with joint legal custody.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion on custody by focusing on Michelle's mental health. | Loffelmacher contends findings about mental health were erroneous. | Benson argues mental-health history supported risk and best interest. | No clear error; court properly weighed mental health. |
| Whether findings that Michelle's live-in relationships harmed A.L. were clearly erroneous. | Loffelmacher asserts no clear error in harming impact from relationships. | Benson contends evidence showed harm to A.L. from relationships. | Findings supported that A.L. was harmed by relationships. |
| Whether court properly considered Brent's initial lack of bonding with A.L. from birth to age two. | Loffelmacher argues Brent’s early absence should be weighed in custody. | Benson emphasizes later bond formation and ability to meet needs. | Court did not abuse discretion; bond developed and needs met. |
| Whether evidence of Brent’s wife’s alcohol use was improperly weighted. | Loffelmacher challenges reliance on alcohol history. | Benson notes no evidence of negative impact on A.L. from wife's drinking. | No clear error; no negative impact established. |
| Whether the court imposed an improper burden to show substantial change in circumstances. | Loffelmacher asserts improper burden for custody modification. | Benson contends standard applied was appropriate or previously recognized. | No improper burden; rationale aligned with interim decision. |
Key Cases Cited
- Maxner v. Maxner, 2007 S.D. 30 (S.D. 2007) (clear-error standard for factual findings in custody cases)
- Arneson v. Arneson, 670 N.W.2d 904 (S.D. 2003) (abuse-of-discretion review for ultimate custody decisions)
- Fuerstenberg v. Fuerstenberg, 591 N.W.2d 798 (S.D. 1999) (factors for custody and continuity considerations)
- McKinnie v. McKinnie, 472 N.W.2d 243 (S.D. 1991) (substantial change of circumstances burden in contested custody)
- Kolb v. Kolb, 324 N.W.2d 279 (S.D. 1982) (subsequent custody modification standard)