Topolski v. Topolski, 2014 ND 68

This is an appeal from an amended judgment changing primary residential responsibility from Jean to Thomas over their minor child, born in 2008.
The original divorce judgment (March 2010) awarded primary residence to Jean with Thomas’ parenting time.
Thomas moved in December 2012 to modify the order, seeking primary residence for himself, a parenting plan for Jean, and to adjust child support.
The district court held an evidentiary hearing, found a material change in circumstances, and issued an amended judgment (July 30, 2013) transferring primary residential responsibility to Thomas and setting a parenting schedule.
Jean sought reconsideration, which the district court denied, and a second amended judgment (August 23, 2013) adopted Thomas’ child support calculations.
Jean appeals the July 8, 2013 findings and the July 30, 2013 amended judgment modifying primary residential responsibility.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the best interest factors were properly applied	Jean argues factors not clearly articulated	Thomas contends court adequately applied factors	Yes; findings sufficiently show basis for decision
Whether the court properly considered pre-divorce conduct	Thomas’ criminal history should be weighed	Weight of pre-divorce conduct is discretionary	Court did not err in not weighing Exhibit-worthy criminal history
Whether there was a material change justifying modification	Change in circumstances supports modification	Evidence fails to show change; district court weighed facts	Yes; material change required by statute supported modification
Whether domestic violence evidence affected the best interests	Domestic violence evidence should trigger presumption	Evidence not triggering presumption still relevant	Evidence considered; no presumption triggered but factored into analysis
Whether the court properly assessed family stability and safety	Jean’s home environment is unstable and unsafe	Thomas offers stable home with Andrea	Findings support stability/safety considerations in favor of Thomas

Wolt v. Wolt, 2010 ND 26 (2010 ND) (guides best interest factor application; findings need not be exhaustive)
Glass v. Glass, 2011 ND 145 (2011 ND) (modification review is factual; findings must be sufficiently specific)
Interest of S.R.L., 2013 ND 32 (2013 ND) (findings may apply to multiple best interest factors)
Wetch v. Wetch, 539 N.W.2d 309 (N.D. 1995) (consider pre-divorce conduct; weight not mandated by findings)
Gietzen v. Gabel, 2006 ND 153 (2006 ND) (domestic violence evidence may be considered under best interests guidance)
Dieterle v. Dieterle, 2013 ND 71 (2013 ND) (purposeful, helpful findings aid appellate review)