Lindblad v. Lindblad, 309 Neb. 776

Background

Parties: Nathan (father) and Jessica (mother) divorced; daughter F.L. (born 2013). Initial dissolution (2016) left Jessica with physical custody; Nathan had parenting time.
2018 modification: Court found Jessica’s substance use and poor decisionmaking endangered F.L.; awarded Nathan primary legal and physical custody and limited Jessica to supervised parenting time supervised by maternal grandparents; court discouraged further modification requests until Jessica completed treatment and demonstrated sustained sobriety.
May 2019 events/proceedings: Nathan sought indefinite suspension of Jessica’s parenting time after multiple drug-related arrests, including one after F.L.’s soccer game where methamphetamine was found in Jessica’s purse; an ex parte order briefly suspended visitation and a temporary order required agency-supervised visits conditioned on drug screens.
Grandparents intervened seeking statutory grandparent visitation; parties entered a temporary mediated schedule (every other Sunday) and the matters were consolidated for trial in May 2020. Trial evidence included testimony about Jessica’s arrests, Better Living supervised visits (32 scheduled; 4 positive tests; 2 no-shows), F.L.’s therapist, and the grandparents’ long history of supervised visits.
District court (May 22, 2020): denied Nathan’s modification request (no material change affecting child’s best interests; prior 2018 order already accounted for substance use; no evidence F.L. was endangered during supervised visits) and granted grandparents’ visitation by clear and convincing evidence; ordered grandparents’ visitation to be coextensive with Jessica’s supervised parenting time. Nathan appealed; Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed (the grandparent order was affirmed as modified to clarify coextensive schedule).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Jessica’s continued drug use and additional arrests constitute a material change in circumstances justifying suspension or further restriction of her supervised parenting time	Nathan: Increase in arrests and the soccer-game incident show a material change; Jessica is unfit even for supervised visits	Jessica/Nathan (trial evidence): 2018 order already addressed substance use; supervised visits have protected F.L.; no evidence mother was impaired or exposed F.L. during supervised time	Denied. No material change shown; supervised plan has been effective and there was no evidence F.L. was endangered.
Whether maternal grandparents proved statutory entitlement to visitation and whether a set schedule was appropriate	Nathan: Grandparents failed to prove best-interests/no adverse interference; a mandated schedule would interfere with his family/time	Grandparents: Long, beneficial relationship with F.L.; visits promote continuity and do not undermine Nathan’s parental authority	Granted (as modified). Grandparents proved all three statutory factors by clear and convincing evidence; visitation is ordered coextensive with Jessica’s supervised parenting time.

Key Cases Cited

Weaver v. Weaver, 308 Neb. 373 (2021) (explains material-change threshold for custody/parenting-time modification)
Jones v. Jones, 305 Neb. 615 (2020) (increase/escalation in parental instability can show material change affecting child’s best interests)
VanSkiver v. VanSkiver, 303 Neb. 664 (2019) (post-decree escalation of abusive behavior supported indefinite suspension of parenting time)
Eric H. v. Ashley H., 302 Neb. 786 (2019) (discusses modification burden: material change then best-interests analysis)
Hamit v. Hamit, 271 Neb. 659 (2006) (sets three-factor clear-and-convincing test for grandparent visitation)
Morris v. Corzatt, 255 Neb. 182 (1998) (denial of grandparent visitation where grandparents undermined parental authority and relationship)
Beal v. Endsley, 3 Neb. App. 589 (1995) (construed grandparent visitation awarded coextensive with a parent’s visitation time)