LeBlanc v. LeBlanc, 100 A.3d 345

mother seeks divorce from Daniel LeBlanc; divorce granted with father as primary custodian of biological children and mother retains medical decisions; there are five children (four biological, born 2005, 2006, 2008, 2010, and a May 2002 stepson)
mother suffered severe depression with psychotic features, multiple hospitalizations, and ongoing treatment; father became primary caregiver during mother’s illness
family home in East Hardwick with long-term stability; mother’s housing unstable and moved between locations during the proceedings
court used 15 V.S.A. § 665(b) factors and found father more stable overall, though both parents capable; ordered father primary custody for biological children and mother to manage medical care; visitation schedule set
trial court awarded father custody of stepson under Paquette; on appeal, Paquette standards and findings scrutinized; Paquette custody of a stepchild reversed and remanded for further findings and explanation

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Grounds for divorce satisfied per statute	LeBlanc argues six-month separation not proven	LeBlanc contends separation evidenced; living apart under same roof possible	No plain error; divorce affirmed
Custody of biological children supported by findings	Mother argues court misapprehended evidence	Father provided stability and extended family support	Yes; custody to father affirmed (with medical decisions by mother)
Visitation reasonable and consistent with best interests	Mother asserts more visitation due to involvement	Court balanced needs and mother’s mental health	Yes; visitation affirmed
Custody of stepson under Paquette standard	Paquette requirements met; stepchild custody to father justified	Record insufficient for Paquette; no clear and convincing findings	Reversed and remanded for Paquette analysis and adequate findings
Paquette standard should be overruled/modified	Paquette too stringent; preponderance suffices	Paquette protects child welfare	Remanded decision; Paquette standard remained unresolved here; majority remands for additional findings

Paquette v. Paquette, 146 Vt. 83 (1985) (requires clear and convincing evidence for stepparent custody in extraordinary circumstances)
Mullin v. Phelps, 162 Vt. 250 (1994) (precludes termination of child-parent contact absent clear and convincing proof; guides remand)
Gustin v. Gustin, 148 Vt. 563 (1987) (requires explicit findings to support custody decision when evidence could support multiple outcomes)
Sprague v. Nally, 178 Vt. 222 (2005) (supports that a party cannot predetermine legal issues from actions at trial)
Hanson-Metayer v. Hanson-Metayer, 2013 VT 29 (2013) (applies deferential standard of review to custody determinations)
Scott v. Scott, 155 Vt. 465 (1990) (recognizes that a spouse may live separate under same roof for purposes of divorce)