Larson v. Larson

Summary

The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed orders denying Gregory Larson’s motion to modify primary residential responsibility, Ana Cristina Conceicao Larson’s motion to relocate with the children to Florida, and her request for attorney fees. The court held the district court’s findings regarding material change, the children’s best interests, relocation factors, and attorney fees were not clearly erroneous or an abuse of discretion.

Holdings

1. When a custodial parent's motion to relocate is contingent on the denial of the other parent's motion to modify primary residential responsibility, the district court does not abuse its discretion by reserving the relocation motion for a later hearing and declining to consider the proposed relocation in the best-interest analysis of the modification motion.
2. The denial of Larson's motion to modify primary residential responsibility was not clearly erroneous because, although a material change in circumstances occurred, the evidence did not establish that changing residential responsibility was necessary to serve the children's best interests.
3. The denial of Conceicao's motion to relocate the children to Florida was not clearly erroneous.
4. The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Conceicao attorney fees for the relocation motion, although the district court incorrectly stated that she had failed to prevail.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court erred by denying Larson's motion to modify primary residential responsibility after finding a material change in circumstances.
2. Whether the district court was required to consider Conceicao's contingent relocation motion when analyzing the best-interest factors on Larson's modification motion.
3. Whether the district court clearly erred in denying Conceicao permission to relocate the children to Florida.
4. Whether the district court abused its discretion by denying Conceicao attorney fees related to the relocation motion.

Disposition

affirmed