Brown v. Brown

387 S.W.3d 159 (Ark. 2012) · Supreme Court of Arkansas · March 1, 2012

Summary

The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Michelle Brown’s motion to modify visitation based on her desire to continue breastfeeding the parties’ child beyond the eighteen-month period specified in the divorce decree. The court held that she failed to establish a material change in circumstances because the possibility that the child might continue nursing beyond eighteen months was within the parties’ contemplation when they agreed to the visitation schedule. Because no material change was shown, the court did not reach whether modification would serve the child’s best interest.

Court
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Writing for the Court
Robert L. Brown
Jurisdiction
Arkansas
Decision date
March 1, 2012
Procedural posture
Michelle Brown appealed the circuit court's dismissal of her motion to modify visitation based on her continued breastfeeding of the parties' child beyond the eighteen-month period specified in the divorce decree.
Standard of review
In domestic-relations cases, the appellate court reviews the evidence de novo but will not reverse the circuit court's findings unless they are clearly erroneous. Special deference is given to the circuit court's credibility determinations and assessment of the child's best interest. Visitation decisions are reviewed for abuse of discretion.
Precedential value
published precedential opinion
Parties
Michelle Brown v. Vernon Brown
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

visitationfamily law proceduremootnessstandard of reviewappellate procedure

Practice areas

family lawchild custody and visitationappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the appeal was moot because the requested breastfeeding-related visitation modification was limited to the period before the child reached two years of age.
  2. Whether the child's continued desire to breastfeed beyond the agreed eighteen-month period constituted a material change in circumstances warranting modification of visitation.
  3. Whether the circuit court was required to determine whether the proposed visitation modification was in the child's best interest after finding no material change in circumstances.

Holdings

  1. The court could not conclusively determine that the appeal was moot because the record was unclear regarding the current breastfeeding arrangement and the issue could potentially arise again.
  2. A parent seeking modification of visitation must prove a material change in circumstances warranting the modification; a parent's changed decision or circumstances that were within the parties' contemplation when they entered the visitation agreement do not satisfy that requirement.
  3. After finding no material change in circumstances, the circuit court was not required to decide whether the proposed visitation modification was in the child's best interest.

Key quotations

After a de novo review of the record, we hold that the circuit court did not clearly err in finding that Michelle failed to prove a material change in circumstances had occurred that warranted a modification in visitation. (387 S.W.3d 159)
In short, Michelle should not be permitted to allege a material change in circumstances that she herself has created. (387 S.W.3d 159)

Factual background

Michelle and Vernon Brown agreed that Michelle would have custody and that Vernon would have limited visitation until their daughter reached eighteen months, to accommodate breastfeeding; standard visitation would begin thereafter. The child was still nursing aggressively at eighteen months, and the parties were unable to agree on a continued nursing-related visitation schedule. Michelle sought modification so she could continue breastfeeding during Vernon's visitation, but the circuit court found no material change in circumstances.

Procedural history

The parties agreed to a limited visitation schedule until their daughter reached eighteen months, after which standard visitation would begin. The circuit court incorporated that agreement into the November 8, 2010 divorce decree. After the child continued breastfeeding beyond eighteen months, Michelle moved to modify visitation; the circuit court found no material change in circumstances and dismissed the motion. The Arkansas Supreme Court denied emergency relief, expedited the appeal, reached the merits despite a mootness argument, and affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…