Lindblad v. Lindblad, 309 Neb. 776

Parties divorced after birth of daughter F.L. (2013); original decree (not in record) left mother Jessica with physical custody and father Nathan with parenting time.
In 2018 the court modified custody: awarded Nathan primary legal and physical custody and limited Jessica to supervised parenting time by maternal grandparents because of Jessica’s substance use, failure to follow treatment, and poor decisionmaking.
In May 2019 Nathan moved to indefinitely suspend Jessica’s supervised parenting time after additional drug-related arrests, including an incident after F.L.’s soccer game where methamphetamine was found in Jessica’s purse; an ex parte order briefly suspended visits and a temporary order required supervised visits at Better Living with drug screens.
Maternal grandparents intervened seeking grandparent visitation; parties entered a temporary mediated agreement giving grandparents regular contact (every other Sunday) and a consolidated trial was set.
At the May 2020 trial evidence showed Jessica had multiple post‑2018 arrests and some failed drug screens, but no proof she was under the influence or exposed F.L. to drugs during supervised visits; grandparents had regularly supervised visits and therapist testimony favored continuity of relationships.
The district court denied Nathan’s request to further modify/suspend Jessica’s parenting time (finding no material change since 2018) and separately granted grandparents’ petition for visitation; appeal followed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Jessica’s continued drug use and increased arrests constitute a material change in circumstances warranting modification of custody/parenting time	Continued use and escalation of drug‑related arrests (esp. soccer‑game arrest) show a material change and justify suspending supervised parenting time	2018 modification already addressed substance use; no new facts showing supervised visits are unsafe or inadequate	Denied — no material change shown that affects child’s best interests; 2018 supervised plan remains appropriate
Whether Jessica is unfit even for supervised parenting time	Arrests, failed drug tests, and possession incidents render her unfit for any parenting time	Supervision (grandparents/Better Living) has protected F.L.; no evidence Jessica was intoxicated or exposed child to drugs during supervised visits	Denied — court found no basis to remove supervised parenting time; supervision adequate
Whether grandparent visitation was properly awarded and whether the schedule is enforceable or moot	Visiting schedule is moot or unenforceable because reinstated supervised visits make grandparent order advisory or unclear	Grandparents satisfied statutory burden; visitation coextensive with supervised parenting time is meaningful and modifiable later	Affirmed as modified — grandparents proved entitlement by clear and convincing evidence; visitation ordered coextensive with Jessica’s supervised visits

Hamit v. Hamit, 271 Neb. 659, 715 N.W.2d 512 (2006) (sets three‑part clear‑and‑convincing test for grandparent visitation)
Jones v. Jones, 305 Neb. 615, 941 N.W.2d 501 (2020) (material escalation in parental instability can justify custody modification)
VanSkiver v. VanSkiver, 303 Neb. 664, 930 N.W.2d 569 (2019) (post‑decree escalation in abusive behavior supported suspending parenting time)
Morris v. Corzatt, 255 Neb. 182, 583 N.W.2d 26 (1998) (grandparent visitation denied where persistent animosity undermined parent‑child relationship)
Beal v. Endsley, 3 Neb. App. 589, 529 N.W.2d 125 (1995) (construction of grandparent visitation tied to parent’s visitation time)
Weaver v. Weaver, 308 Neb. 373, 954 N.W.2d 619 (2021) (clarifies material‑change threshold and deference principles for custody modification)