Lindblad v. Lindblad
962 N.W.2d 545
| Neb. | 2021Background
- Parties divorced in 2016; daughter F.L. born 2013. 2018 modification awarded father (Nathan) legal and physical custody after finding mother (Jessica) used controlled substances and failed to follow treatment; all Jessica’s parenting time was ordered supervised by maternal grandparents.
- 2019: Nathan filed to indefinitely suspend Jessica’s supervised parenting time after several drug-related arrests, including one at a youth soccer game where methamphetamine was found in Jessica’s purse. An ex parte suspension and a temporary order limited Jessica to short, agency-supervised visits conditioned on drug screens.
- Maternal grandparents intervened seeking statutorily authorized grandparent visitation; parties mediated a temporary every-other-Sunday schedule (Jessica not present).
- Consolidated trial (May 2020): evidence showed Jessica had multiple post-2018 arrests and several failed drug tests at the supervised-agency visits, but no evidence she was under the influence or exposed F.L. to drugs during supervised visits; grandparents had long, regular contact and had safely supervised visits. F.L.’s therapist reported trauma related to earlier living with mother but was doing well; visits with mother should be consistent.
- District court (May 2020) denied Nathan’s modification request (no material change since 2018; supervised visitation remains appropriate) and granted grandparents’ visitation by clear and convincing evidence. Nathan appealed; Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed as modified.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Nathan) | Defendant's Argument (Jessica/Grandparents) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Jessica’s continued substance use and additional drug arrests since the 2018 modification constitute a material change in circumstances justifying suspension of her parenting time | Continued drug use and escalation of arrests (especially the soccer-game arrest where drugs were found near F.L.) show a material change and render Jessica unfit even for supervised visits | 2018 modification already addressed substance use; supervised visits have protected F.L.; no evidence Jessica was impaired or exposed F.L. during supervised time | Affirmed denial of modification — no material change affecting F.L.’s best interests; supervised visitation remains adequate |
| Whether grandparents proved entitlement to statutory grandparent visitation and whether the court’s schedule was proper | Grandparents’ requested schedule would interfere with Nathan’s family routine and was unnecessary; grandparents failed to show visitation would not interfere with parent-child relationship | Grandparents have a longstanding, beneficial relationship with F.L.; visitation is in the child’s best interests and does not undermine Nathan’s parental role | Affirmed (as modified): grandparents proved all statutory elements by clear and convincing evidence; visitation awarded coextensive with Jessica’s supervised parenting time |
Key Cases Cited
- Hamit v. Hamit, 271 Neb. 659 (Neb. 2006) (articulates three-factor test and clear-and-convincing standard for grandparent visitation)
- Jones v. Jones, 305 Neb. 615 (Neb. 2020) (escalation in parental instability can constitute material change)
- VanSkiver v. VanSkiver, 303 Neb. 664 (Neb. 2019) (post-decree escalation in abusive behavior may justify suspending parenting time)
- Weaver v. Weaver, 308 Neb. 373 (Neb. 2021) (definition and threshold inquiry for material change in custody modification)
- Eric H. v. Ashley H., 302 Neb. 786 (Neb. 2019) (issues determined in prior custody orders are preclusive absent new facts)
- Morris v. Corzatt, 255 Neb. 182 (Neb. 1998) (grandparent visitation denied where grandparents undermined parental authority and interfered with parent-child relationship)
- Beal v. Endsley, 3 Neb. App. 589 (Neb. Ct. App. 1995) (grandparent visitation may be awarded coextensive with a parent’s visitation)