In re the Marriage of Heiar
954 N.W.2d 464
| Iowa Ct. App. | 2020Background
- Joanna and Aaron Heiar married in 2004 and have three minor children (one born 2010, twins born 2012). Joanna was the primary day-to-day caregiver; Aaron was the primary breadwinner (physician).
- The couple separated in 2018; temporary joint legal custody was ordered and Joanna had temporary physical care; they attended reconciliation counseling with therapist Elizabeth Herrington.
- Joanna signed a written release authorizing Herrington to testify/produce records, then revoked consent orally at trial; Herrington hesitated and left the stand to consult counsel and was not recalled; her records were admitted subject to objections.
- The district court awarded joint legal custody, awarded physical care to Joanna, set a minimum visitation schedule for Aaron (alternating weekends, one weeknight, alternating summer weeks), ordered child support of $2,434.45/month and $1,000/month alimony for 36 months, and required Aaron to pay one-half of specified child expenses.
- Aaron appealed seeking joint physical care or expanded visitation, contesting the expense allocation and arguing the court’s questioning chilled Herrington’s testimony and that Joanna’s credibility was overstated.
- The appellate court affirmed the custody and visitation rulings, held Aaron failed to preserve his claim about the therapist and that the court did not abuse discretion, reversed the order requiring Aaron to pay half of the listed child expenses, and remanded the issue of appellate attorney fees to the district court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Joanna) | Defendant's Argument (Aaron) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Court questioning of therapist and her refusal to testify / preservation | Aaron failed to preserve a ruling; court properly addressed confidentiality revocation | Court’s remarks chilled witness and deprived Aaron of evidence | No preserved error; judge did not abuse discretion given Joanna’s oral revocation and therapist’s concerns |
| Credibility determinations | Trial court appropriately weighed demeanor and evidence | Trial court gave undue credence to Joanna and her witnesses | Appellate court gives weight to trial court credibility findings; no reversible error |
| Physical care (joint physical care vs. awarding Joanna) | Aaron sought joint physical care or more parenting time | Joanna relied on historic role as primary caretaker and stability for children | Affirmed: Joanna awarded physical care; joint physical care not in children’s long-term best interests (stability, Aaron’s lack of insight) |
| Allocation of children’s expenses beyond guidelines | Joanna supported court’s split-expense order | Aaron argued listed items are ordinary child costs already covered by guideline support | Reversed: court may not separately require splitting ordinary expenses already covered by child support guidelines; expense award vacated |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Mauer, 874 N.W.2d 103 (Iowa 2016) (dissolution proceedings equitable; de novo review)
- In re Marriage of Hansen, 733 N.W.2d 683 (Iowa 2007) (factors guiding joint physical care decisions)
- In re Marriage of Murphy, 592 N.W.2d 681 (Iowa 1999) (best-interest objective for physical-care determinations)
- In re Marriage of Okland, 699 N.W.2d 260 (Iowa 2005) (child support guidelines encompass normal child needs)
- In re Marriage of McDermott, 827 N.W.2d 671 (Iowa 2013) (treatment of extracurricular/child expenses under shared custody and guideline frameworks)
- Meier v. Senecaut, 641 N.W.2d 532 (Iowa 2002) (preservation rule: issues must be raised and decided at trial to preserve appeal)
- Zebecki v. Zebecki, 389 N.W.2d 396 (Iowa 1986) (appellate deference to trial court credibility assessments)
- Fite v. Fite, 485 N.W.2d 662 (Iowa 1992) (private-school or discretionary child costs do not automatically justify deviation from guidelines)