858 N.W.2d 607
Neb. Ct. App.2014Background
- Dissolution of Aaron and Elizabeth Rommers' marriage; one minor child Samantha born 2012.
- Elizabeth moved with Samantha to Arizona in December 2012; Nebraska proceedings began in 2013.
- District court awarded Elizabeth custody with removal to Arizona, and provided for a parenting plan, child support, and travel expenses.
- Trial evidence showed Elizabeth as primary caregiver; Aaron had temper concerns and alleged inappropriate online contact with young girls.
- District court recognized Farnsworth removal factors but treated Coleman v. Kahler as controlling; ultimately ordered removal and set visitation, child support, and tax exemptions.
- Appellate court reversed removal analysis error, affirmed custody to Elizabeth, but remanded for proper Farnsworth removal analysis, redetermination of parenting plan and child support; tax exemption issue deemed not properly raised at trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Removal from Nebraska after custody award | Rommers argued removal required Farnsworth analysis and legitimate reason. | Rommers argued Coleman applicability; removal analysis not necessary due to original action. | Removal remanded for proper Farnsworth analysis; reversal of removal order. |
| Custody determination adequacy | Rommers contends custody to Elizabeth may not reflect best interests. | Elizabeth as primary caregiver supported by record. | Custody to Elizabeth affirmed on de novo review as in Samantha’s best interests. |
| Parenting plan and child support on remand | Plan and support should better foster Aaron’s relationship with Samantha. | Existing plan favored Elizabeth; support/expenses aligned with best interests. | Remanded for redetermination of parenting plan and child support on current record. |
| Tax exemption issue on appeal | Aaron sought tax exemption; issue not properly raised. | District court record insufficient to decide; not preserve. | |
| Tax exemption not addressed; issue deemed not properly presented. |
Key Cases Cited
- Coleman v. Kahler, 17 Neb. App. 518 (2009) (removal analysis not applicable to original custody action; cautions against merging custody and removal before proper framework)
- Farnsworth v. Farnsworth, 257 Neb. 242 (1999) (three broad factors for removal: motives, quality-of-life, and impact on noncustodial visitation)
- Clinton M. v. Paula M., 21 Neb. App. 856 (2014) (removal and custody decisions must consider material change in circumstances)
- State on behalf of Savannah E. & Catilyn E. v Kyle E., 21 Neb. App. 409 (2013) (guides consideration of removal in context of best interests)
- Vogel v. Vogel, 262 Neb. 1030 (2002) (reasonable visitation framework to preserve parent-child relationship)
- Robb v. Robb, 268 Neb. 694 (2004) (custody factors; deference to trial court in weighing credibility)