J.R.H. v. O.M.H. (mem. dec.)
25A03-1611-DR-2534
| Ind. Ct. App. | Aug 10, 2017Background
- Parents married in 2003 and have three children (born 2006, 2009, 2011); acrimonious separation in 2014.
- Mother struggled with severe alcohol and prescription medication abuse; entered inpatient treatment (Fairbanks) in Oct–Nov 2014 and had limited contact with children thereafter; Father had physical custody since Oct 2014.
- While in treatment Mother began a relationship with a fellow patient, became pregnant, moved to Indianapolis, and has since changed residences multiple times.
- Children are bonded to Father, live on his family farm, do well in school, maintain strong ties to extended family and community, and expressed preference to remain with Father.
- Guardian ad Litem and custody evaluator recommended Father retain custody citing stability, continuity of home/school/therapist, and concerns about Mother’s judgment and residential instability.
- Trial court criticized Father’s hostile behavior toward Mother but concluded children’s best interests favored remaining with Father; Mother appealed arguing insufficient evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Mother’s Argument | Father’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred by awarding primary physical and legal custody to Father | Award lacks sufficient evidence; Mother’s recovery and progress support custody change | Father’s home is stable, children bonded and doing well; disrupting them would be harmful | Affirmed: evidence supports awarding custody to Father |
| Whether parental misconduct (Father’s hostile conduct) should prevent custody award | Father’s conduct harms parent-child relationship; should preclude benefit from discord | Father’s misconduct criticized but does not outweigh stability factors | Court upheld custody to Father despite criticizing his behavior |
Key Cases Cited
- Best v. Best, 941 N.E.2d 499 (Ind. 2011) (trial courts afforded deference in family-law credibility and best-interest determinations)
- D.C. v. J.A.C., 977 N.E.2d 951 (Ind. 2012) (appellate review does not reweigh evidence or reassess credibility)
- L.C. v. T.M., 996 N.E.2d 403 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (reversal only when judgment is clearly against facts and circumstances)
- Pierce v. Pierce, 620 N.E.2d 726 (Ind. Ct. App. 1993) (parent may not gain custody by sowing discord between child and other parent)