Yvonne S. v. Wesley H., 245 P.3d 430

Yvonne S. appeals a denial, without a hearing, of a motion to modify a custody order issued in August 2008 granting Wesley H. primary physical custody.
Allison, born September 22, 1993, was nearly 16 at the time of the 2009 motion and expressed a strong preference to live with her father.
The 2008 custody order followed a 2008 evidentiary process where the court weighed Allison’s preference, age, and home environment, and found a change in circumstances warranted modification in Wesley’s favor.
In June 2009 Yvonne alleged several changed circumstances, including Allison’s health, grades, and behavior, seeking shared physical custody; Wesley opposed and Allison again supported living with him.
The superior court denied Yvonne’s motion to modify custody without a hearing, finding no substantial change in circumstances when viewed in aggregate.
This Court reviews de novo whether the alleged changes constitute a prima facie showing of changed circumstances warranting a hearing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a prima facie showing of changed circumstances warranted a hearing	Yvonne contends there were substantial changes since 2008.	Wesley maintains no substantial change in circumstances.	No substantial change; no hearing required.
Whether aggregate changes justify modification	Multiple changes collectively warrant modification.	Allegations are minor or outside review; do not require modification.	Aggregate changes do not justify a custody modification.
Impact of an older child's expressed preference on custody	Allison’s preference should weigh heavily in modification.	Preference is a factor but not dispositive if no substantial change.	Older child preference weighed but not sufficient here to justify a change.
Whether the court erred by denying a hearing given Allison’s educational health concerns	Allison’s health and academic performance indicate potential risk under Wesley.	Progress and explanations mitigate concerns; no basis for hearing.	No error; concerns not proven to constitute substantial change.
Waiver and scope considerations on evidentiary material	Record should include evidence from after 2008.	Post-2008 material limited; some claims waived for not being raised below.	Appropriate scope maintained; waived matters excluded.

Maxwell v. Maxwell, 37 P.3d 424 (Alaska 2001) (denial of hearing proper if facts would not warrant change)
Iverson v. Griffith, 180 P.3d 943 (Alaska 2008) (change in circumstances must support modification in best interests)
Barile v. Barile, 179 P.3d 944 (Alaska 2008) (aggregate changed circumstances review for custody modification)
Valentino v. Cote, 3 P.3d 337 (Alaska 2000) (weighing child’s mature preference in custody decisions)
J.L.P. v. V.L.A., 30 P.3d 590 (Alaska 2001) (relevant inquiry about change since prior order)
C.R.B. v. C.C., 959 P.2d 375 (Alaska 1998) (evidence and standard for domestic relations fact patterns)
Michele M. v. Richard R., 177 P.3d 830 (Alaska 2008) (educational needs as a factor in custody decisions)