Sarah D. v. John D.
352 P.3d 419
| Alaska | 2015Background
- Sarah and John separated in Nov 2012 after a dispute; each obtained short-term domestic-violence protective orders, then stipulated to a mutual no-contact order which they repeatedly violated and continued a sporadic sexual relationship.
- They entered a property settlement (John kept the house; Sarah could live there until May 31) and the court issued a QDRO awarding Sarah about $16,000 from John’s retirement.
- Sarah consented to her attorney’s withdrawal in March 2013, later sought interim attorney’s fees and continuances to obtain new counsel and QDRO funds; the superior court denied those requests and she proceeded pro se at a four‑day custody trial in May–June 2013.
- John was represented throughout (with financial help from his parents); his stepfather JL sought to intervene for grandparent visitation and the court allowed limited participation and later ordered grandparent visitation during parental custodial time.
- The superior court found the parties’ relationship dysfunctional, found Sarah committed one act of domestic violence, found neither party particularly credible, awarded shared physical custody but sole legal custody to John, and granted grandparent visitation; Sarah appealed several rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Sarah) | Defendant's Argument (John) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interim attorney’s fees | Court should award interim fees because John has greater earning potential | Economic situations comparable; John had no obvious funds and parents’ help doesn’t make him able to pay | Denial affirmed — court did not abuse discretion given relative finances, QDRO, and lack of payment source |
| Continuance to obtain counsel/funds | Denial forced Sarah to proceed pro se and prejudiced custody rights | Sarah knew trial date, consented to withdrawal, lacked diligence in securing counsel | Denial affirmed — no abuse of discretion; Sarah had months’ notice and opportunity |
| Compel marriage counselor testimony | Counselor would provide exculpatory testimony and relevant evidence | Court instructed Sarah to subpoena; she did not do so | Denial affirmed — court gave correct procedure to pro se litigant; failure to subpoena waived claim |
| Grandparent intervention/visitation (JL) | Intervention and visitation infringed parent rights; award improperly created de facto custody to grandparents | JL cared for child frequently and has psychological-parent arguments | Visitation order vacated — record did not show JL was denied access and the order lacked required findings; no de facto custody found |
| Custody & domestic-violence findings | Court failed to make detailed findings on multiple alleged DV incidents and misapplied DV standard; custody award affected by unresolved DV issues | Court found one act by Sarah and otherwise situational violence; awarded custody based on best-interest balancing (stability/family support) | Custody decision remanded — domestic-violence findings were insufficient; court must make detailed findings re: alleged incidents and apply AS 25.24.150 framework; other factual custody findings largely upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Limeres v. Limeres, 320 P.3d 291 (Alaska 2014) (standard and discretion for interim fee awards in divorce)
- Lone Wolf v. Lone Wolf, 741 P.2d 1187 (Alaska 1987) (abuse-of-discretion standard for interim fee decisions)
- Siggelkow v. Siggelkow, 643 P.2d 985 (Alaska 1982) (consideration of property division and incurred fees in interim-fee analysis)
- Parks v. Parks, 214 P.3d 295 (Alaska 2009) (domestic-violence definition includes attempts; trial court must solicit information from pro se litigants)
- Harris v. Governale, 311 P.3d 1052 (Alaska 2013) (attempted assault constitutes domestic violence regardless of victim’s actual fear)
- Merrill v. Merrill, 368 P.2d 546 (Alaska 1962) (need for detailed findings of fact on contested matters)
- Jaymot v. Skillings-Donat, 216 P.3d 534 (Alaska 2009) (standard for joint legal custody and deference to trial court credibility findings)
- Kristina B. v. Edward B., 329 P.3d 202 (Alaska 2014) (framework for rebutting presumption against awarding custody to a parent with DV history)
- Stephanie F. v. George C., 270 P.3d 737 (Alaska 2012) (treatment of domestic-violence incidents and custody implications)