McNutt v. Yates
427 S.W.3d 749
Ark. Ct. App.2013Background
- Shauna McNutt and Matthew Yates divorced in Sep 2011; they share two children, M.Y. and N.Y.; Shauna had primary physical custody with joint legal custody; Matthew sought a child-support reduction after losing his job in 2011; Matthew filed a custody-modification motion on Mar 2, 2012 alleging parental alienation and other concerns; Shauna sought a continuance (denied) and represented herself at the April 12, 2012 hearing; the court found a material change in circumstances and awarded custody to Matthew with retroactive child support to April 2011; Shauna appeals on continuance denial, material-change finding, and retroactive child-support modification.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Continuance denial review | Shauna | Yates | No abuse of discretion; denial affirmed. |
| Material change in circumstances for custody | Shauna argues no material change. | Yates argues change proven. | Court found material change; custody awarded to Matthew affirmed. |
| Retroactive child-support modification | Shauna challenges retroactivity. | Yates argues proper modification law applied. | Reversed and remanded for proper retroactive-ordering. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sharp v. Keeler, 99 Ark.App. 42 (Ark. App. 2007) (mother's alienation conduct deemed material change in circumstances)
- Ford v. Ford, 347 Ark. 485 (Ark. 2002) (best-interest standard; de novo review with deference to trial court on credibility)
- Yell v. Yell, 56 Ark.App. 176 (Ark. App. 1997) (retroactive child-support modification limitations)
- Word v. Remick, 75 Ark.App. 390 (Ark. App. 2001) (credibility and best-interests; deference to trial court)
- Sossamon v. Davis, 271 Ark. 156 (Ark. 1980) (equity review allows affirmance for reasons not stated by trial court)
- Ingram v. Century 21 Caldwell Realty, 52 Ark.App. 101 (Ark. App. 1996) (presumption of findings when record silent on credibility)
- Carter v. Carter, 19 Ark.App. 242 (Ark. App. 1986) (use of contempt before changing custody)
