Harris v. Governale
2013 Alas. LEXIS 142
Alaska2013Background
- Kimberly Harris sought primary physical custody of her daughter; the superior court awarded primary custody to John Governale; Kimberly appeals.
- The parties previously shared custody; in 2009 they settled to share physical custody with Kimberly dismissing a DV protective order.
- John had long-term custody since 2007; the court found John provided stability and the child had a close bond with paternal grandparents.
- In 2011 John and his girlfriend Anecia had a physical altercation; John was charged with assault in the fourth degree (later dismissed); they separated and lived apart.
- Kimberly moved to Florida with her husband; Kimberly argued the Florida move and John’s home life created instability affecting the child.
- The court’s best interests analysis weighed stability and continuity heavily in John’s favor, with other factors deemed neutral; Kimberly challenges weight given to past custody and domestic violence issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best interests: stability and continuity standard. | Stability in Kimberly's home warranted more weight. | Long-term stability favors John due to bond with paternal grandparents and history. | Court’s stability analysis not clearly erroneous; affirmed but remanded for Anecia incident reconsideration. |
| Presumption against custody for domestic violence history. | John had multiple DV acts triggering AS 25.24.150(g). | No clear history of DV against Kimberly; presumption not triggered. | Presumption not triggered; affirmed regarding that issue; remanded for related best-interests weighing of Anecia incident. |
| A November 2011 Anecia incident considered in best interests. | DV incident should be weighed under AS 25.24.150(c)(7). | Incident not deemed weighty; not considered under c(7). | Incident must be weighed in best interests; remanded for reconsideration of custody in light of this analysis. |
| Effect of substance abuse on child welfare. | John's substance issues should have affected custody determination. | Evidence mixed; court reasonably found no direct impact on the child’s well-being. | No clear error; substance-abuse finding upheld. |
| Visitation scheduling and allocation of travel expenses. | Visitation schedule and travel costs overly burdens Kimberly; scheduling errors. | Schedule reasonably balances holidays, breaks, and parent–child time; costs addressed separately. | Schedule upheld; remanded for visitation expense allocation to occur after child-support determination. |
Key Cases Cited
- Iverson v. Griffith, 180 P.3d 943 (Alaska 2008) (abuse of discretion standard and weighing factors in custody decisions)
- Rooney v. Rooney, 914 P.2d 212 (Alaska 1996) (continuity includes broader social-emotional factors and community ties)
- Pam R. v. State, Dep’t of Health & Soc. Servs., 185 P.3d 67 (Alaska 2008) (domestic violence considerations in child custody context)
- Heather W. v. Rudy R., 274 P.3d 478 (Alaska 2012) (analysis of domestic violence in best interests under AS 25.24.150(c))
- Barbara P. v. State, Dep’t of Health & Soc. Servs., 234 P.3d 1245 (Alaska 2010) (weighting of domestic violence evidence in dependency and custody contexts)