343 P.3d 400
Wyo.2015Background
- Parents divorced after marriage and four children; custody, visitation, and support were reserved after initial decree and later decided by the district court.
- District court awarded Mother primary physical custody, expressly found shared custody inappropriate due to poor communication, and granted Father "liberal" visitation.
- Visitation schedule allowed Father overnight time totaling 152 nights in 2014 (41.6% of the year).
- Father sought recalculation of support under Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-304(c) (joint presumptive support) based on >40% overnight time; court ordered joint presumptive support without making findings on substantial contributions to child expenses.
- Mother moved under W.R.C.P. 60(a) and (b)(1) arguing the visitation created de facto shared custody (a mistake/clerical error); district court denied relief.
- Supreme Court affirmed denial of Rule 60 relief on custody (not de facto shared custody), reversed the child-support ruling for failure to determine whether both parents "contribute substantially" as § 20-2-304(c) requires, and held there was no clerical error in the visitation calculation.
Issues
| Issue | Loran (Mother) Argument | Loran (Father) Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether liberal visitation awarding Father 41.6% of nights created de facto shared physical custody | The award contradicts the court’s explicit finding that shared custody was inappropriate and thus must be a mistake | Visitation is liberal but not equal; 41.6% is below substantially equal (50%) so not shared custody | Court: Not de facto shared custody; shared physical custody means substantially equal (~50%); 41.6% is not substantially equal; affirmed denial of Rule 60(b)(1) relief |
| Whether court erred in awarding joint presumptive child support under § 20-2-304(c) without statutory findings | Court had to determine whether both parents "contribute substantially" beyond support; no such finding was made, so award was improper | Father qualified under the >40% overnight test and thus joint presumptive tables apply | Court: Reversed and remanded — district court abused discretion by applying § 20-2-304(c) without finding substantial contributions; district court must make that factual determination |
| Whether the visitation/support order contained a clerical error correctable under W.R.C.P. 60(a) | The visitation calculation must be incorrect or clerical because it contradicts the no-shared-custody finding | The district court intended the schedule; calculation is correct and not clerical | Court: No clerical error; calculation (152 nights, 41.6%) was correct and reflected the court’s intent; no Rule 60(a) relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Buttle v. Buttle, 196 P.3d 174 (Wyo. 2008) (reversed a district court that awarded 50/50 shared physical custody)
- JS v. MB, 237 P.3d 974 (Wyo. 2010) (affirmed custody plan that technically gave primary custody to one parent despite near-equal time because findings supported the arrangement)
- Davidson v. Carrillo, 325 P.3d 444 (Wyo. 2014) (held liberal visitation creating significant parenting time does not automatically equal shared custody absent sufficient parity or supporting findings)
- Testerman v. Testerman, 193 P.3d 1141 (Wyo. 2008) (explained shared custody is disfavored and requires findings; emphasized stability and parental communication)
- Jensen v. Milatzo-Jensen, 297 P.3d 768 (Wyo. 2013) (applied § 20-2-304(c) framework and discussed >40% overnight threshold for joint presumptive support)