History
  • No items yet
midpage
McCarty v. McCarty
2015 SD 59
| S.D. | 2015
Read the full case

Background

  • Divorce in July 2007; joint legal custody with Mother as primary physical custodian.
  • After divorce, Mother remained in Box Elder; Father moved to Gillette, Wyoming.
  • Children typically spent school year with Mother and summers with Father.
  • June 2012: circuit court awarded Father primary physical custody; May 2013 motion seeking change filed by Mother.
  • August 2013: court changed custody back to Mother, finding no substantial change needed due to a scheduled review hearing.
  • Trial focused on Fuerstenberg factors; two major changes cited: dissolution of Father’s medical group and Stepmother’s stage 4 metastatic breast cancer.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether substantial change in circumstances was required to modify custody McCarty argues a contested 2013 hearing required proof of substantial change McCarty contends no substantial change was needed due to prior review scheduling Court erred in not requiring substantial change; substantial change required
Whether returning custody to Mother was in the children’s best interests based on substantial change Father asserts changes cited were not genuinely substantial or relevant Mother asserts the changes affected stability and best interests favored return to Mother Yes; returning custody to Mother was in the children’s best interests given substantial changes.

Key Cases Cited

  • Benson v. Loffelmacher, 824 N.W.2d 82 (2012 S.D. 75) (interim custody context requiring substantial change to modify)
  • Roth v. Haag, 834 N.W.2d 340 (2013 S.D. 48) (best interests framework and Fuerstenberg factors guidance)
  • Schieffer v. Schieffer, 826 N.W.2d 633 (2013 S.D. 11) (abuse of discretion standard; factors consideration)
  • Fuerstenberg v. Fuerstenberg, 591 N.W.2d 798 (1999 S.D. 35) (separation of siblings and Fuerstenberg factors relevance)
  • Kreps v. Kreps, 778 N.W.2d 843 (2010 S.D. 12) (balanced approach to Fuerstenberg factors; best interests)
  • Beaulieu v. Birdsbill, 815 N.W.2d 569 (2012 S.D. 45) (flexible application of factors in custody decisions)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: McCarty v. McCarty
Court Name: South Dakota Supreme Court
Date Published: Jul 8, 2015
Citation: 2015 SD 59
Docket Number: 26957
Court Abbreviation: S.D.