Heather W. v. Rudy R.

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court reviewed a superior court order modifying a stipulated shared-custody arrangement and awarding primary physical custody to Rudy R. The court upheld the findings of a substantial change in circumstances and the application of the best-interest factors, but held that the superior court improperly refused to consider evidence of Rudy's prior domestic violence. The case was remanded for an evidentiary hearing on whether Rudy had a history of domestic violence and, if so, whether he rebutted the statutory presumption against awarding him custody.

Holdings

1. The superior court did not abuse its discretion by finding a substantial change in circumstances based on the aggregate of Heather's DUI and license-related conduct, relationship-related incidents, instability, and deterioration in the parties' relationship.
2. The superior court did not abuse its discretion by considering Heather's residential instability, relationship history, decision-making, or credibility insofar as those matters related to statutory best-interest factors and her parenting ability.
3. The superior court did not abuse its discretion by weighing the statutory best-interest factors, briefly addressing an undisputed factor, or considering Heather's credibility in evaluating her parenting judgment and ability to meet the child's needs.
4. The superior court abused its discretion by refusing to consider evidence of Rudy's prior domestic violence. The court must conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether Rudy has a history of domestic violence under AS 25.24.150(g) and, if so, whether he rebutted the statutory presumption against awarding custody to a parent with such a history.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the superior court abused its discretion by finding a substantial or material change in circumstances warranting custody modification.
2. Whether the superior court improperly considered evidence concerning Heather's lifestyle, habits, character, relationships, and credibility in determining the child's best interests.
3. Whether the superior court assigned disproportionate weight to certain statutory best-interest factors or failed to adequately consider other factors.
4. Whether the superior court erred by refusing to consider evidence of Rudy's prior domestic violence and by failing to determine whether the statutory presumption against awarding custody to a parent with a history of domestic violence applied.

Disposition

remanded