Carrillo v. Morales Ibarra
2019 Ark. App. 189
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2019Background
- Unmarried parents Roberto Carrillo and Nancy Morales Ibarra have a son (born 2009); paternity was acknowledged and later formally established.
- Roberto petitioned (May 2016) to establish paternity, obtain visitation, and seek custody; a temporary agreed order (June 2016) left custody with Nancy and provided Roberto specific visitation.
- At the July 2017 hearing, both parents were found loving, employed, and financially responsible; the child was thriving and well-adjusted.
- The parents had ongoing communication and cooperation problems about schooling, healthcare, extracurriculars, overnight stays, and feeding concerns; Nancy had been the child’s primary caregiver.
- The attorney ad litem and the circuit court concluded joint custody was inappropriate due to the parents’ inability to cooperate; the court awarded primary custody to Nancy and set a visitation schedule for Roberto.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Roberto) | Defendant's Argument (Nancy) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court failed to give due consideration to Arkansas’s statutory preference for joint custody and thus erred by denying joint custody | Roberto argued the court ignored the statutory preference for joint custody and that the parents effectively coparented, so joint custody was in the child’s best interest | Nancy argued the parents’ poor communication and lack of cooperation made joint custody unworkable and harmful; she urged primary custody remain with her | Court held the trial court considered the preference but permissibly rejected joint custody based on lack of cooperation; affirmed |
| Whether the denial of joint custody was clearly erroneous under de novo review with deference to trial-court fact findings | Roberto contended the court misweighed evidence and credibility and thus clearly erred | Nancy and ad litem relied on trial-court findings about past conduct and credibility; urged deference | Court affirmed that credibility and cooperation findings were not clearly erroneous and declined to reweigh evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Louton v. Dulaney, 519 S.W.3d 367 (Ark. Ct. App. 2017) (standard of review in custody cases; de novo review with deference to factual findings)
- Ryan v. White, 471 S.W.3d 243 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015) (once paternity is established, custody rules for married parents apply)
- Bundy v. Womble, 558 S.W.3d 429 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018) (statutory preference for joint custody does not override child's best interest)
- Wilhelm v. Wilhelm, 539 S.W.3d 619 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018) (failure to award joint custody does not prove the court failed to consider it)
- Cooper v. Merwether, 549 S.W.3d 395 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018) (appellate court must not reweigh credibility on appeal)
- Cooper v. Kalkwarf, 532 S.W.3d 58 (Ark. 2017) (heightened deference to trial court in child-custody credibility determinations)
- Li v. Ding, 519 S.W.3d 738 (Ark. Ct. App. 2017) (parents’ ability to cooperate is crucial to propriety of joint custody)