In follow-up to my 1/22/13 Post:
The appellate division released another opinion on
January 23, 2012, again reiterating the necessity of a plenary hearing. In M.I. v. B.I., the trial court conducted an
in camera interview of the parties’ fifteen (15) year old daughter, who the
court found to be “very sophisticated” and who expressed a desire to live with
her father, and indicated her concerns for her mother’s parenting style. The
parties have two children.
The trial court denied the father’s application for
a transfer of custody, without holding a plenary hearing. The trial court
expressed concerns about splitting up the two children.
The Appellate Division held, that the “views of Amy,
then age fifteen, were entitled to significant, albeit not controlling,
weight.” The Appellate Division was satisfied that the father had made a prima
facie case of changed circumstances, “specifically the preferences of a “very
sophisticated” fifteen-year-old girl who expressed a preference for living with
one parent and concerns about the parenting style of her then parent of primary
residence.” Since the Appellate Division did not find the record to contain sufficient
factual support for the judge’s denial of the father’s application, the panel
remanded the matter for further consideration, and a plenary if the issues
remain contested.
No comments:
Post a Comment