In Re the Marriage of Christian A. Marsh and Sally J. Marsh Upon the Petition of Christian A. Marsh, and Concerning Sally J. Marsh, 17-0358

Christian and Sally Marsh divorced in 2010; they share one son, N.J.M., born shortly before the divorce. The decree awarded joint legal custody and placed physical care with Sally; Christian received alternating weekend visitation and limited summer time, with $300/month child support.
At divorce, Christian was unemployed and living with his parents; over the next seven years he completed education, became a registered nurse, remarried, purchased a home, and was expecting a child.
Over the years Sally permitted additional overnight visits; by the time of the modification hearing Christian typically had 8–12 overnights per month, though the parties disputed the extent and timing of increased visitation and Christian produced no documentation.
In May 2016 Christian petitioned to modify the decree, initially seeking primary physical care and later amending to request shared physical care; Sally counterclaimed for increased child support given Christian’s higher income.
The district court denied the custody-modification request, found Christian had not shown a material and substantial change in circumstances affecting the care arrangement (except increased income), and increased his monthly child support; Christian appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Christian proved a material and substantial change in circumstances to modify physical care	Christian: his employment, remarriage, home purchase, and new child constitute changes not contemplated at divorce that justify modification	Sally: those are ordinary life changes the decree could anticipate and do not show superior ability to care for the child	No — court found changes insufficient to justify changing physical care (stability noted but not outcome-changing)
Whether the parties’ past visitation created a de facto shared-care arrangement	Christian: he effectively had nearly 50% time with the child for years	Sally: visitation never amounted to an established shared-care arrangement	No — court found no credible evidence of an established shared-care arrangement
Whether Christian’s motives (financial) affect the custody request	Christian: did not dispute motives beyond seeking more time with child	Sally: contends Christian primarily sought change for financial reasons (to improve loan prospects)	Credibility concerns about motives weighed against modification; motives undermined request
Whether appellate attorney fees should be awarded to Sally	N/A (Christian is appellant)	Sally sought fees based on merits, need, and Christian’s ability to pay	Yes — appellate court awarded Sally $2,000 toward attorney fees and costs

In re Marriage of Hoffman, 867 N.W.2d 26 (Iowa 2015) (de novo review for custody modification and child’s best interests control)
In re Marriage of Mayfield, 577 N.W.2d 872 (Iowa Ct. App. 1998) (custody modified only when child will receive superior care)
In re Marriage of Brown, 778 N.W.2d 47 (Iowa Ct. App. 2009) (custody fixed should be disturbed only for most cogent reasons)
Frederici v. Frederici, 338 N.W.2d 156 (Iowa 1983) (elements of change relied on for modification: unforeseen, more or less permanent, and related to child’s welfare)
In re Marriage of Sullins, 715 N.W.2d 242 (Iowa 2006) (factors for awarding appellate attorney fees: merits, needs, and ability to pay)
Meier v. Senecaut, 641 N.W.2d 532 (Iowa 2002) (preservation of issues for appellate review)