351 P.3d 272
Wyo.2015Background
- Parents separated after birth of daughter ZGL (born 2009). Father sought paternity, joint legal custody, and visitation in 2011; Mother sought primary physical custody.
- Multiple allegations of domestic and child abuse were made between 2008–2014; investigations (DFS, law enforcement, Child Protection Team) repeatedly found allegations of child abuse unsubstantiated. Father pled no contest to unlawful contact in 2012 and a protection/no-contact order issued at that time.
- The court ordered psychological and parenting assessments by Dr. Steven Nelson, who reviewed records, interviews, supervised visits, and concluded risk of abuse in Father’s care was minimal; he recommended supervised visitation by a professional counselor until further notice.
- Parties adopted a June 2013 settlement granting Mother primary physical custody and providing for Father’s supervised and then graduated visitation per Dr. Nelson’s recommendations; the district court adopted that settlement in June 2013.
- In 2014 Mother relocated temporarily to Pittsburgh with ZGL and later reported disclosures to a different therapist (Dr. Jandrasits), prompting another investigation that was also closed without substantiation. Father sought to enforce visitation in May 2014; the district court held a hearing in July 2014 focused on visitation and issued a graduated supervised-visitation plan, keeping ZGL in Teton County during supervised visits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (Father) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether court abused discretion by excluding testimony about prior domestic abuse | Mother: Court improperly excluded testimony of pre-settlement domestic abuse and failed to consider child-abuse testimony, contrary to statutory duty to consider family violence | Father: Prior incidents were considered when approving the 2013 settlement; later child-abuse claims were investigated and unsubstantiated; court properly limited scope of hearing to visitation | Court: No abuse of discretion. Incidents prior to the 2013 settlement had already been considered; Dr. Jandrasits was permitted to testify and the court incorporated her recommendations into supervised visitation plan |
| Whether travel restriction (child may not leave Teton County without both parents) violated Mother's right to travel | Mother: The county travel restriction unconstitutionally infringes her right to travel with child | Father: Restriction was temporary during supervised visitation and necessary to protect visitation integrity; supervised visitation has ended, making the issue moot | Court: Issue is moot because supervised visitation ended and travel restriction no longer in effect; declined to review constitutional claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Arnott v. Arnott, 293 P.3d 440 (Wyo. 2012) (trial court has broad discretion in custody and visitation determinations)
- Wise v. Ludlow, 346 P.3d 1 (Wyo. 2015) (appellate review of evidentiary rulings is for abuse of discretion; reversible only if prejudicial)
- White v. Shane Edeburn Constr., LLC, 285 P.3d 949 (Wyo. 2012) (mootness doctrine: courts should not decide issues that will have no practical effect)