John v. Bolinder
2016 Ark. App. 357
Ark. Ct. App.2016Background
- J. David John (father) and Megan Marie Bolinder (mother) never married; they share a son born March 12, 2010. John lives in Chicago; Bolinder lives in Bentonville, AR.
- Trial court (Feb 2012) awarded primary custody to Bolinder, visitation to John (one week per month plus extended summer visitation), and ordered child support.
- Feb 2014: trial court reduced nonsummer visitation to one weekend per month due to the child's school enrollment; summer schedule otherwise unchanged.
- Nov 2014–Apr 2015: John moved for release of Bolinder’s medical/psychological records and sought modification of child support or summer visitation (asking reduced support while exercising summer visits and more summer time).
- June 30, 2015: trial court denied release of medical records and denied modification of summer visitation for lack of material change, but slightly adjusted summer schedule. The court expressly reserved ruling on John’s child-support modification and set contempt proceedings for later trial.
- John appealed the June 30 order; the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for lack of finality and jurisdiction because unresolved child-support and contempt matters remained pending.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred in denying release of mother’s medical/psych records | John: records relevant to custody/visitation issues; should be produced | Bolinder: records protected/not required; trial court properly denied release | Court did not reach merits — appeal dismissed for lack of finality because other matters remained pending |
| Whether trial court erred in denying modification of summer visitation | John: reduction in nonsummer visitation and his exercise of summer time justify more summer visitation or reduced child support during those periods | Bolinder: no material change in circumstances; current schedule appropriate | Court did not reach merits — appeal dismissed for lack of finality because modification of child support and contempt issues remained pending |
| Whether the June 30, 2015 order was final and appealable | John: remaining matters (child support and contempt) are merely collateral and do not defeat finality | Bolinder: unresolved matters mean order is not final | Court: order not final; further proceedings were pending so appellate jurisdiction lacking; appeal dismissed without prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Harold Ives Trucking Co. v. Pro Transp., Inc., 341 Ark. 735, 19 S.W.3d 600 (2000) (an order is not final when further proceedings are pending that are more than collateral)
- Norman v. Norman, 342 Ark. 493, 30 S.W.3d 83 (2000) (policy against piecemeal appeals; an order that does not practically conclude merits is not appealable)
- Mitchell v. Mitchell, 98 Ark. App. 47, 249 S.W.3d 847 (2007) (supporting principle that unresolved related matters defeat finality)