Croce v. Cawley

828 A.2d 519 (R.I. 2003) · Supreme Court of Rhode Island · May 22, 2003

Summary

The Rhode Island Supreme Court affirmed a Family Court order modifying the father's visitation schedule with his son and denying joint custody. The court held that the Family Court did not abuse its discretion because it considered the child's best interests and the parents' ability to cooperate in making decisions concerning the child.

Court
Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Writing for the Court
Per Curiam
Jurisdiction
Rhode Island
Decision date
May 22, 2003
Procedural posture
Appeal from a Family Court order modifying visitation and denying the father's request for joint custody.
Standard of review
The Supreme Court reviews a Family Court decision modifying a prior custody award for abuse of discretion.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Joseph A. Croce v. Debra Cawley
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

visitationchild custodystandard of reviewfamily law procedureappellate procedure

Practice areas

family lawfamily law procedureappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the parties' alleged informal agreement or practice could modify the existing Family Court visitation order.
  2. Whether the Family Court abused its discretion by modifying visitation in the manner ordered.
  3. Whether the Family Court abused its discretion by denying the father's request for joint custody.
  4. Whether the Family Court properly applied the child's best interests as the foremost consideration in determining visitation and custody.

Holdings

  1. Only the Family Court, and not the parties themselves, has the power to modify a Family Court order; therefore, the 2002 order was treated as a modification of the 1996 order.
  2. The Family Court did not abuse its discretion in modifying the father's visitation rights because it properly considered the child's best interests.
  3. The Family Court did not abuse its discretion by denying joint custody where the evidence showed that the parents could not work in close cooperation to make decisions in the child's best interests.

Key quotations

If the Family Court has properly considered what custody arrangements are in the best interests of the children, we will not disturb such a discretionary ruling. (520)

Factual background

The parties were never married and are the parents of a child born on September 28, 1994, who had lived with the mother since birth. The Family Court awarded the mother sole custody in 1996 and granted the father visitation two days per week for a total of six and one-half hours. In 2002, the Family Court expanded the father's visitation to include overnight, weekend, and vacation visitation but limited weeknight visits and denied joint custody because the parents could not work closely together in making decisions concerning the child.

Procedural history

The Family Court awarded the mother sole custody in 1996 and granted the father limited visitation. The father moved in 2001 for joint custody and increased visitation. After a hearing, the Family Court issued a May 9, 2002 order increasing visitation but denying joint custody. The father appealed, and the Rhode Island Supreme Court summarily decided the appeal after the parties showed cause why it should not be summarily decided.

Remand instructions

The papers in the case were remanded to the Family Court; no substantive modification instructions were issued.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…