C.G. v. K.N.
C.G. v. K.N. No. 215 WDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Jul 26, 2017Background
- Mother (K.N.) petitioned to modify custody to relocate her two sons (A.G., b.2002; R.G., b.2005) to her home in Valdez, Alaska; Father (C.G.) has had primary custody in Erie County, PA for nine years under an Alaskan Parenting Agreement (2007) and a 2016 Custody Consent Agreement.
- Trial court held a de novo custody hearing (Dec. 13, 2016) with testimony from both parents, relatives, the children, scoutmaster, pastor, and others; the court also spoke with the children in chambers.
- Mother sought primary physical custody (relocation) and alleged past physical discipline by Father (she previously filed a PFA that was denied). Children expressed a preference to live with Mother in Alaska.
- Father’s evidence showed the children are integrated in Erie County: daily care by paternal grandparents, established healthcare and counseling, school and extracurricular involvement (sports, Boy Scouts), and improving school performance for A.G.
- Trial court applied 23 Pa.C.S. §§ 5328(a) (best‑interest factors) and 5337(h) (relocation factors), found many factors neutral, but gave decisive weight to stability/continuity (education, family, community) favoring Father, and denied relocation while increasing Mother’s summer partial custody to eight weeks.
- Superior Court affirmed, holding the trial court did not abuse its discretion and Mother failed to meet the burden that relocation was in the children’s best interests.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (Father) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred by denying Mother’s request to relocate the children to Alaska | Mother argued evidence (children’s preference, quality of life in Alaska, Mother’s stable home/support) supported relocation and primary custody with her | Father argued stability in Erie (school, healthcare, counseling, paternal grandparents, extracurriculars) makes relocation harmful to continuity and not in children’s best interests | Denied — court found Mother failed to carry burden; stability/continuity with Father during school year outweighed relocation factors |
| Whether trial court gave insufficient weight to evidence of abuse (Section 5328(a)(2)) | Mother pointed to a prior PFA alleging Father physically disciplined the children and argued this supported relocation for safety | Father denied ongoing abuse, admitted limited past physical discipline as last resort; PFA was denied; no evidence of ongoing risk presented | Held neutral — trial court found allegations unproven and gave them insufficient weight to change custody outcome |
| Whether trial court gave insufficient weight to children’s well‑reasoned preference (Section 5328(a)(7)) | Mother emphasized both children’s expressed desire to live with her in Alaska and their maturity to form a reasoned preference | Father noted children’s ties to Erie, activities, and that preferences did not overcome need for educational/familial stability | Held that although children’s preferences favored Mother, the court reasonably concluded other best‑interest factors (notably stability/continuity) prevailed |
Key Cases Cited
- C.R.F. v. S.E.F., 45 A.3d 441 (Pa. Super. 2012) (standard of review in custody appeals; defer to trial court credibility findings)
- M.A.T. v. G.S.T., 989 A.2d 11 (Pa. Super. 2010) (abuse of discretion standard explained for custody matters)
- M.J.M. v. M.L.G., 63 A.3d 331 (Pa. Super. 2013) (trial court discretion to weigh custody factors)
- A.M.S. v. M.R.C., 70 A.3d 830 (Pa. Super. 2013) (requirement to consider §5337(h) relocation factors and to state reasons)
- D.K. v. S.P.K., 102 A.3d 467 (Pa. Super. 2014) (when relocation factors apply and need to consider them where children would move significant distance)
- C.B. v. J.B., 65 A.3d 946 (Pa. Super. 2013) (trial court must delineate assessment of §5328(a) factors in its decision)
- King v. King, 889 A.2d 630 (Pa. Super. 2005) (appellate court defers to trial court’s credibility and weight determinations)
- Ketterer v. Seifert, 902 A.2d 533 (Pa. Super. 2006) (custody proceedings and respect for trial court’s observations of witnesses)
- Bulgarelli v. Bulgarelli, 934 A.2d 107 (Pa. Super. 2007) (definition of abuse of discretion in family law context)