Grant v. Grant

981 A.2d 1172 (Del. 2009) · Supreme Court of Delaware · September 18, 2009 · No. No. 604, 2008

Summary

The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed a Family Court judgment awarding the parties joint custody and shared residential placement of their children. The Court held that the Family Court properly applied the children's best-interests standard and found no abuse of discretion or clearly erroneous factual findings.

Court
Supreme Court of Delaware
Writing for the Court
Myron T. Steele, Chief Justice; Holland, Justice; Ridgely, Justice
Jurisdiction
Delaware
Decision date
September 18, 2009
Docket number
No. 604, 2008
Procedural posture
Father appealed the Family Court's decision on the parties' cross-petitions to modify custody.
Standard of review
The Supreme Court reviews facts and law, including the trial judge's inferences and deductions. It will not disturb factual findings unless clearly wrong and will affirm inferences and deductions supported by the record and resulting from an orderly and logical deductive process.
Precedential value
published Delaware Supreme Court decision
Parties
Thomas A. Grant v. Rhonda J. Grant
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

child custodyfamily law procedureappellate procedurestandard of reviewfamily law

Practice areas

family lawchild custodyappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Family Court erred in applying the children's best-interests standard when awarding the parties joint custody and shared residential placement.
  2. Whether the Family Court improperly failed to consider Father's allegations concerning Mother's caregiving history, the children's living arrangements, and Mother's financial circumstances.
  3. Whether the Family Court erred by ordering counseling for the children without also ordering counseling for the parents and grandparents.

Holdings

  1. The Family Court did not abuse its discretion or commit error in awarding the parties joint custody with shared residential placement and in ordering Mother to share her time with the children with the maternal grandparents.
  2. The Supreme Court found no reversible error in the Family Court's consideration of the custody evidence or in its order that the children receive counseling without requiring counseling for the parents and grandparents.

Key quotations

We will not disturb findings of fact unless they are clearly wrong, and we will affirm the inferences and deductions of the trial court if they are supported by the record and are the product of an orderly and logical deductive process.
Upon review of the record in this case, we find no error in the Family Court's application of the best interests of the children standard.

Factual background

The parties had two children and entered a 2002 consent order providing for joint custody and shared residential placement. During Father's approximately three-and-a-half-year military absence, the children lived primarily with their maternal grandparents because of Mother's work schedule, while Father maintained contact and provided financial support. After Father returned and retired from the military, both parents sought custody-related relief; the children expressed a desire to spend equal time with both parents and continue spending time with their maternal grandparents.

Procedural history

The parties previously entered a consent order providing for joint custody and shared residential placement of their two children. After Father returned from an extended military assignment, Mother filed an emergency custody petition and Father filed a cross-petition. Following a hearing, the Family Court ordered joint custody, shared residential placement, Mother's sharing of custodial time with the maternal grandparents, and counseling for the children. The Supreme Court affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…