Ronny M. v. Nanette H.
2013 Alas. LEXIS 70
Alaska2013Background
- Ronny M. and Nanette H. are Florida-born parents of two boys; Nanette relocated with the children to Alaska in 2009 after a history of domestic violence and supervision by Florida authorities; the Alaska superior court awarded Nanette primary physical custody with a form of joint legal custody, and Ronny was granted limited visitation subject to travel expenses; child support was ordered in favor of Nanette; Ronny challenged custody, visitation, and support orders; the supreme court affirmed custody and support but remanded visitation expenses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction for custody proceedings | Ronny asserted Florida retained jurisdiction under PKPA/UCCJEA. | Nanette argued Alaska was the home state and thus had jurisdiction. | Alaska had jurisdiction; home state rule applied. |
| Relocation to Alaska and best interests | Move undermined father–child relationship and was improper. | Move was legitimate for family needs and did not primarily hinder visitation. | Relocation was legitimate; in best interests to relocate. |
| Willingness to facilitate the other parent’s relationship | Ronny claimed Nanette hindered contact with the father. | Nanette fostered the relationship and tried to maintain contact. | Findings supported Nanette’s greater willingness to facilitate contact. |
| Form of custody and decision-making authority | Ronny contends joint legal custody with Nanette having final say is improper. | Modified joint legal custody appropriate to encourage cooperation. | Not an abuse of discretion; form of joint legal custody upheld. |
| Visitation expenses | Ronny should not bear 100% of travel costs; burden unfair given income. | Court should allocate travel expenses reasonably; Nanette’s higher income allowed more support. | Visitation expense order reversed and remanded for reallocation; consideration of PFDs permitted on remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Chesser v. Chesser-Witmer, 178 P.3d 1154 (Alaska 2008) (nine AS 25.24.150(c) factors; best interests standard)
- Vachon v. Pugliese, 931 P.2d 379 (Alaska 1996) (relocation best interests analysis guidance)
- Moeller-Prokosch v. Prokosch, 27 P.3d 314 (Alaska 2001) (child custody considerations; continuity and stability)
- Harvey v. Cook, 172 P.3d 794 (Alaska 2007) (income treatment in child support)
- Hamilton v. Hamilton, 42 P.3d 1107 (Alaska 2002) (good cause variance and support standards)
- Ebertz v. Ebertz, 113 P.3d 643 (Alaska 2005) (PKPA/UCCJEA interplay in jurisdiction)
- House v. House, 779 P.2d 1204 (Alaska 1989) (custody factors; best interests)
- Bartlett v. State, Dep’t. of Revenue ex rel. Bartlett, 125 P.3d 328 (Alaska 2005) (guidance on child support and enforcement)