Brice v. Brice
2013 Ark. App. 620
Ark. Ct. App.2013Background
- William Brice and Tatyana Brice divorced; decree awarded custody to Tatyana with William to pay child support and alimony.
- At decree entry, AnB was 14, NB 8, AmB 6; AnB adopted by William during marriage.
- Trial court concluded it was in the children's best interests for custody to remain with the mother, with liberal visitation for William.
- Court noted both parents suitable; evidence centered on AnB's preference and overall family stability.
- AnB expressed current preference to live with her mother; concerns about mother’s conduct were weighed against credibility and best interests.
- Ad litem recommended custody to William, but the court was not bound by that recommendation; a motion to strike improprieties in appeal brief was granted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred in not awarding William custody | Brice asserts the trial court mishandled custody and favored mother | Brice emphasizes credibility and maternal stability supporting mother | No reversible error; custody with mother supported by findings |
| Whether AnB's preference should control custody | AnB previously favored father, now prefers mother | Court weighed evidence and credibility; best interests prevail over stated preferences | Best interests prevail; custody remains with mother |
| Whether trial court erred in relying on mother's conduct allegations | Tatyana’s alleged behavior could undermine care | Court heard allegations and counterarguments; found mother suitable | No reversible error; court credited credibility determinations |
| Whether ad litem recommendation required follow-on | Court should have followed ad litem's recommendation | Court is not bound by ad litem recommendations | Not required to follow ad litem recommendation |
Key Cases Cited
- Dodd v. Gore, 2013 Ark. App. 547 (Ark. App. 2013) (de novo standard for custody; credibility weighed in determining best interest)
- Union Pac. R.R. Co. v. Barber, 356 Ark. 268, 149 S.W.3d 325 (Ark. 2004) (court may strike or disregard information not in the record on appeal)