Elliott v. Settje

27 P.3d 317 (Alaska 2001) · Supreme Court of Alaska · July 27, 2001 · No. S-9688

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court reviewed a superior court order awarding joint physical custody of a two-year-old child and establishing a schedule with custody exchanges every two to three days. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding joint physical custody, weighing the statutory best-interests factors, or declining to follow the guardian ad litem's recommendation for primary physical custody. The court affirmed the judgment.

Holdings

  1. The superior court did not abuse its discretion in awarding joint physical custody because it considered the statutory best-interests factors, found them fairly equally balanced, and reasonably determined that both parents were fit and able to foster strong relationships with the child.
  2. The stability-and-continuity factor does not automatically receive special weight when the other custody factors are closely balanced, and it does not create a presumptive preference for the primary caregiver.
  3. The superior court was not required to follow the guardian ad litem's recommendation and did not abuse its discretion because its reasons and custody order were not clearly erroneous and were consistent with the GAL's report and trial testimony.
  4. When shared custody is in the child's best interests, AS 25.20.060(c) authorizes and requires a schedule assuring frequent and continuing contact with each parent to the maximum extent possible; the schedule here was not an abuse of discretion.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the superior court abused its discretion by awarding joint physical custody rather than primary physical custody to Elliott.
  2. Whether the superior court improperly failed to give controlling or special weight to the stability-and-continuity custody factor.
  3. Whether the superior court improperly disregarded or gave insufficient weight to the guardian ad litem's report and testimony.
  4. Whether the superior court abused its discretion by imposing a joint-physical-custody schedule requiring custody exchanges every two to three days.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (15)

  • Jenkins v. Handel, 10 P.3d 586, 589 (Alaska 2000)(followed)
  • Valentino v. Cote, 3 P.3d 337, 339 (Alaska 2000)(followed)
  • B.B. v. D.D., 18 P.3d 1210, 1212 (Alaska 2001)(followed)
  • Platz v. Aramburo, 17 P.3d 65, 68 (Alaska 2001)(followed)
  • McQuade v. McQuade, 901 P.2d 421, 424 n. 9, 426 (Alaska 1995)(followed)
  • Gratrix v. Gratrix, 652 P.2d 76, 80 (Alaska 1982)(followed)
  • Craig v. McBride, 639 P.2d 303, 305, 308 (Alaska 1982)(followed)
  • Evans v. Evans, 869 P.2d 478, 479, 482-83 (Alaska 1994)(distinguished)
  • Vachon v. Pugliese, 931 P.2d 371, 374, 377-80 (Alaska 1996)(distinguished)
  • I.J.D. v. D.R.D., 961 P.2d 425, 430 (Alaska 1998)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 15.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…