Thompson v. Thompson, A-15-708

Justin and Nicole Thompson married in 2007; child born 2011; separated in 2013 and Nicole filed for dissolution. Temporary order gave Nicole custody and Justin every-other-weekend parenting time.
At trial, both parents found fit; Nicole was primary caregiver with a stable work schedule; Justin is a firefighter with a 24-on/24-off schedule and roughly 20 days off per month and previously cared for the child on his off days.
Evidence showed a generally close parent-child relationship with Justin, but also revealed concerns about Justin (a 2014 suicide threat while intoxicated, past domestic assault, missed daycare payments, emotional episodes at daycare). Justin completed outpatient mental-health treatment after 2014.
Justin sought either custody or expanded parenting time to match his atypical schedule; Nicole opposed expanding parenting time, preferring to maintain the temporary every-other-weekend plan.
The district court awarded custody to Nicole and parenting time to Justin every other weekend (Fri 6 p.m.–Sun 6 p.m.) plus two holidays per year; Justin appealed admission of a proposed standard parenting-plan exhibit and the parenting-time decision.

Issue	Justin's Argument	Nicole's Argument	Held
Admissibility of exhibit 22 (court's standard parenting plan)	Exhibit shows court uses a standard schedule and supports his argument for a different tailored plan; should be admitted	Exhibit was irrelevant/outdated and not the current court standard	Court did not abuse discretion in excluding the exhibit (irrelevant/outdated)
Whether the district court's parenting plan served child's best interests	Awarded parenting time (only 4 days/month) is insufficient given Justin's parenting role and availability; plan should be tailored to his schedule	Maintain temporary schedule; no specific objection beyond suitability of current plan	Court abused discretion in awarding only every-other-weekend; reversed and remanded for a parenting plan that accounts for Justin's available parenting days
Whether trial court improperly shifted burden to Justin to disprove the standard schedule	Justin argued burden was shifted to him	Nicole relied on temporary order and standard schedule	Appellate court did not reach this claim because it remanded on parenting-time grounds

Hill v. Hill, 20 Neb. App. 528, 827 N.W.2d 304 (Neb. Ct. App. 2013) (custody and parenting-time determinations reviewed for abuse of discretion)
In re Invol. Dissolution of Wiles Bros., 285 Neb. 920, 830 N.W.2d 474 (Neb. 2013) (admissibility governed by Nebraska Evidence Rules; trial court discretion)
Maranville v. Dworak, 17 Neb. App. 245, 758 N.W.2d 70 (Neb. Ct. App. 2008) (trial court discretion to set reasonable parenting time)
Fine v. Fine, 261 Neb. 836, 626 N.W.2d 526 (Neb. 2001) (parenting time fosters noncustodial parent's relationship)
Davidson v. Davidson, 254 Neb. 357, 576 N.W.2d 779 (Neb. 1998) (factors relevant to child's best interests)
Kamal v. Imroz, 277 Neb. 116, 759 N.W.2d 914 (Neb. 2009) (court not required to grant equal parenting time if not in child's best interests)