In the Matter of Paternity: Of the Unborn Child of C.C. (mem. dec.), 65A01-1603-JP-626

Child E.O. born Dec. 19, 2011; paternity established Jan. 5, 2012. Initial agreed order (Sept. 26, 2012) named Mother primary physical custodian and granted Father parenting time and child support.
Parents later entered an alternating-weeks parenting-time agreement (Oct. 30, 2014); no change to primary custody at that time.
Father filed petitions to modify custody in 2013 and 2014; custody modification remained pending at the Jan. 20, 2016 hearing addressing parenting time for E.O.’s upcoming kindergarten start.
Mother works 12-hour night shifts and has had multiple residence, employment, and relationship changes in recent years; E.O. has been cared for regularly by nannies and by Mother’s household caregivers.
Father lives in Mt. Vernon, has stable employment and flexible hours, strong local family support network, and adjusted his schedule to maximize parenting time; trial court found Father can provide greater stability as child enters school.
Trial court (Feb. 18, 2016) retained joint legal custody but awarded Father primary physical custody, finding a substantial change in circumstances and that the modification was in the child’s best interests. Mother appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Mother)	Defendant's Argument (Father)	Held
Whether Father established a substantial change in circumstances to justify modifying physical custody	Mother: The hearing related only to parenting time for kindergarten; no substantial change affecting custody was proven	Father: Child’s upcoming kindergarten, Mother’s residential/employment instability, night-shift work, and Father’s stability/family support constitute substantial change making custody modification in child’s best interests	Court: Affirmed — substantial change found (kindergarten readiness, Mother’s instability and work schedule, Father’s stability); modification to grant Father primary physical custody upheld

In re Paternity of T.P., 920 N.E.2d 726 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (standard of review and deference to trial court in family law matters)
In re Paternity of K.I., 903 N.E.2d 453 (Ind. 2009) (appellate deference in custody determinations)
Kirk v. Kirk, 770 N.E.2d 304 (Ind. 2002) (appellate review limits; reversal only if evidence positively requires it)
In re Paternity of A.S., 948 N.E.2d 380 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (burden on party seeking custody modification)
Parks v. Grube, 934 N.E.2d 111 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (do not reweigh evidence or judge witness credibility on appeal)
Kanach v. Rogers, 742 N.E.2d 987 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (trial court must consider statutory factors; need not specify which factor changed)
In re Paternity of C.S., 964 N.E.2d 879 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (child’s readiness for kindergarten can be a substantial change warranting custody modification)