Schurmann v. Schurmann

Summary

The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the modification of the parties’ parenting-time arrangement, holding that domestic-violence evidence did not create a visitation presumption under the current statute and that the district court’s findings were not clearly erroneous. The court reversed and remanded the child-support determination because the district court relied on income information it had found unreliable and failed to properly apply the child-support guidelines. The court permitted additional evidence on remand for recalculation of support.

Holdings

1. After primary residential responsibility has initially been awarded, parenting-time modifications are governed by N.D.C.C. § 14-05-22(2), not by the domestic-violence presumption applicable to an initial award of residential responsibility under N.D.C.C. § 14-09-06.2(1)(j). A parenting-time restriction requires a preponderance-of-the-evidence showing that unrestricted parenting time is likely to endanger the child's physical or emotional health.
2. A move by a parent, remarriage, impracticality of the existing parenting plan, and conflict or lack of agreement concerning the plan may constitute a material change in circumstances warranting modification of parenting time when modification is in the children's best interests.
3. A district court is not required to rely on recommendations made by a child psychologist at the time of the parties' original stipulation when no expert testimony established that the recommendations remain pertinent after material circumstances have changed.
4. A district court errs as a matter of law when it reduces child support based on income information it has found to be inaccurate, incomplete, or evasive. An obligor who fails to provide reliable income information does not satisfy the burden required to obtain a modification, and income must be imputed under the applicable guidelines.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court properly modified Schurmann's parenting time despite evidence of his prior domestic violence.
2. Whether the district court was required to give controlling weight to recommendations made by a child psychologist when the original parenting arrangement was stipulated.
3. Whether the district court properly calculated and reduced child support when it found Schurmann's income information unreliable and included a gift as in-kind income.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded