In Re Kurowski, 161 N.H. 578

Divorced parents share joint legal custody and equal parenting rights over their daughter’s education.
They could not agree on home schooling vs. public schooling, prompting father to seek judicial resolution.
The 2008 Parenting Plan preserved joint decision-making and set a January 2010 meeting to discuss transition to public school.
In 2009 the trial court ordered daughter to attend public school for 2009–2010, after finding disagreement made agreement impracticable.
Mother appealed arguing constitutional and religious rights were violated, but the court affirmed as a sustainable exercise of discretion in the child’s best interests.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether best interests analysis was proper without RSA 461-A:11 modification findings	Kurowski contends modification prerequisites apply	Kurowski argues best interests resolves joint-authority dispute	Yes; best interests used where joint authority could not be exercised, not requiring RSA 461-A:11
Whether the decision infringes parental rights or religious liberty	Mother asserts constitutional rights to direct upbringing and religion are violated	Court considered welfare with respect to education and religion, not suppressing beliefs	No; decision grounded in child’s welfare and not an impermissible religious infringement
Whether the GAL's testimony unsupported by expert was plain error	Mother claims GAL’s lay opinion biased and unreliable	GAL’s opinion supported by record and other evidence; not plain error	No plain error; court did not rely solely on GAL and ruled with substantial independent basis
Whether the trial court’s educational purpose definition aligned with law	Mother argues court invented an education purpose contrary to RSA chapters	Parameters aligned with 461-A:6 factors and public/home-school statutes	Yes; court’s reasoning aligned with statutory framework and was not unsustainable

In the Matter of Choy & Choy, 154 N.H. 707, 919 A.2d 801 (2007) (limits on appellate review of discretionary parenting decisions; best interests standard)
In the Matter of Hampers & Hampers, 154 N.H. 275, 911 A.2d 14 (2006) (precedes guidance on credibility and weight in family disputes)
In re Alex C., 161 N.H. 231, 13 A.3d 347 (2010) (de novo review of legal questions in custody cases)
State v. Parker, 155 N.H. 89, 921 A.2d 366 (2007) (interpretation of trial court orders; legal error review)
Sanborn v. Sanborn, 123 N.H. 740, 465 A.2d 888 (1983) (standards for considering parental religious training in best interests)
Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 120 S. Ct. 2054, 147 L. Ed. 2d 49 (2000) (parental rights protected by due process; deference to fit parents)