Stanley Sweet v. Rebecca Foreman, 367 P.3d 156

Foreman and Sweet share custody of a child (born 2005); Sweet previously had primary custody, Foreman had scheduled visitation before modification.
Foreman petitioned to modify the custody order to obtain primary physical custody; magistrate granted the modification after trial.
Sweet moved for reconsideration and for an amendment/new trial; the court denied reconsideration.
The case has a long history of prior custody modifications and related disputes, including a 2009 order asserting Idaho’s continuing UCCJEA jurisdiction and a 2010 modification giving Sweet primary custody.
In 2014 Foreman obtained ex parte orders in Washington; subsequent events prompted Foreman to seek modification again, leading to the 2015 trial and July 28 Order granting Foreman primary custody.
Sweet appeals via direct permissive appeal; the court ultimately remands to address a pending motion for a new trial and denies both sides’ attorney fees on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court abused its discretion by not allowing new evidence	Sweet argues new evidence should be considered on reconsideration	Foreman contends the court acted within discretion incorporating existing record	Appeal premature; remand to rule on Sweet's motion for a new trial
Whether there was substantial evidence supporting Foreman’s custody modification	Sweet contends evidence did not prove a material change in circumstances in Child’s best interests	Foreman argues change in circumstances and best interests support modification	Ruling deferred; remanded for ruling on new-trial motion, no substantive held on evidence sufficiency
Whether attorney fees on appeal should be awarded	Sweet seeks fees under 12-121	Foreman seeks fees under 12-121	No attorney fees awarded on appeal due to premature remand

Pieper v. Pieper, 125 Idaho 667 (1994) (modification standards for custody; material change in circumstances)
McGriff v. McGriff, 140 Idaho 642 (2004) (abuse of discretion standard in custody matters)
Lamont v. Lamont, 158 Idaho 353 (2015) (standard of review for discretionary custody decisions; permissive appeal)
Obendorf v. Terra Hug Spray Co., 145 Idaho 892 (2008) (new-trial standards for newly discovered evidence)
PHH Mortg. Servs. Corp. v. Perreira, 146 Idaho 631 (2009) (new trial/new evidence framework; parallel to civil procedure rules)
Idaho Military Historical Soc’y, Inc. v. Maslen, 156 Idaho 624 (2014) (imposition of frivolousness-based attorney-fee award standard)
Rocky Mountain Power v. Jensen, 154 Idaho 549 (2012) (abuse of discretion standard and reconsideration matters)