Paine v. Buffa, 2014 Vt. 10

Paine and Buffa separated in 2011; trial court awarded sole legal custody to father and shared physical custody, based in part on mother’s plan to relocate to Georgia.
Sunset Lake Road house was the couple’s significant asset; title was in mother’s name, with funds from mother’s parents used for purchase/improvements.
Mother planned to relocate with the children to Georgia; trial court considered relocation when determining parental rights and responsibilities.
An equity share of $85,000 in the Sunset Lake Road house was ordered in favor of father, payable within 120 days, with interest and foreclosure/sale options if unpaid.
Mother’s parents pursued a separate collection action in Georgia; the court treated the funds provided as gifts for purposes of valuing the marital estate.
The Vermont Supreme Court affirmed the custody and property rulings, and rejected arguments that the funds were loans or that the equity division was inappropriate.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether sole legal custody to father was proper given relocation plans	Mother asserted relocation would not impair father’s rights	Father maintained relocation would significantly impair his parental rights	Affirmed; relocation considered, supporting sole legal custody to father
Whether funds from mother’s parents were gifts or loans	Funds were loans needing repayment	Funds were gifts not requiring repayment	Affirmed; court properly treated funds as marital gifts for equity calculation
Whether the Sunset Lake Road equity was correctly included and divided	Nonparties’ interests excluded or misvalued; equity division excessive	Property properly within marital estate; award balanced contributions	Affirmed; equity allocated to both parties with $85,000 to father appropriate
Whether the 120-day payment schedule was an abuse of discretion	Payment deadline would force sale or foreclosure despite repairs	Court can secure fairness and timely distribution	Affirmed; schedule within court’s discretion

Gazo v. Gazo, 166 Vt. 434 (1997) (relocation considerations in §665(b) determinations; dominance of relocation plans when near-equal factors)
Hawkes v. Spence, 178 Vt. 161 (2005) (relocation impact on ability to exercise parental responsibilities; Hawkes standard applied)
Thompson v. Pafundi, 188 Vt. 605 (2010) (deferential review of family court custody decisions; temporary orders re relocation considerations)
Porcaro v. Drop, 816 A.2d 1280 (2002) (direct application of best-interests analysis when final order follows; relocation noted)
DeLeonardis v. Page, 188 Vt. 94 (2010) (nonparty interests in marital property and equitable division)