Best v. Best
2011 Ind. LEXIS 67
| Ind. | 2011Background
- Dissolution decree incorporated a property settlement and approved a 2005 custody order; disputes continued over custody, support, and parenting time.
- In 2007 mediation produced a court-approved agreement addressing custody and parenting time; later disputes arose.
- In 2008, the father petitioned for custody modification; the mother petitioned for modification and contempt related to noncompliance.
- An emergency petition regarding parenting time and communications preceded a contested hearing; the trial court found the mother in contempt and imposed penalties.
- The Special Judge granted the father sole legal custody and primary physical custody of both A.B. and M.B., with parenting time for the mother; the mother appealed.
- Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part; Supreme Court granted transfer to review MB’s physical custody modification.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether MB's physical custody modification was proper | Best argues no change in statutory factors or best interests. | Best contends substantial changes and best interests support modification. | Modification of MB's physical custody affirmed |
| Whether there was a change in circumstances supporting modification | Best claims no substantial change in any factor. | Best notes substantial and continuing changes in factors. | Substantial change found and documented in factors |
| Whether the modification was in MB's best interests | Best asserts modification not in MB's best interests. | Best finds father more capable regarding education and health decisions. | Modification in MB's best interests found |
| Whether the trial court erred in denying primary physical custody to Best | Mother argues she should have primary custody given evidence. | Father argues evidence supports shared/father-dominant arrangement. | Court upheld father's custody award; no reversal on this point |
| Whether contempt finding against Best was proper | Contempt finding properly imposed for nonpayment of fees. | Contempt finding was erroneous on appeal; fees judgment valid though. | Contempt finding reversed; fee judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- In re T.S., 906 N.E.2d 801 (Ind. 2009) (deference to trial court credibility in domestic relations)
- J.I. v. J.H. (In re K.I.), 903 N.E.2d 453 (Ind. 2009) (appellate deference and standard of review in custody cases)
- Dunson v. Dunson, 769 N.E.2d 1120 (Ind. 2002) (standard for reviewing custody findings)
- Kirk v. Kirk, 770 N.E.2d 304 (Ind. 2002) (you may not substitute your own judgment; must support result with evidence)
- Quillen v. Quillen, 671 N.E.2d 98 (Ind. 1996) (evidence review requiring direct or inferable support for findings)
- Yanoff v. Muncy, 688 N.E.2d 1259 (Ind. 1997) (standard for reviewing findings of fact)
- Estate of Reasor v. Putnam County, 635 N.E.2d 153 (Ind. 1994) (procedural framework for evaluating findings)