Summary 2009 WY 44

Summary of Decision issued March 30, 2009

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Parris v. Parris

Citation: 2009 WY 44

Docket Number: S-08-0247; S-08-0248

Appeal from the District Court of Laramie County, the Honorable Peter G. Arnold, Judge.

Representing Appellant Father: Daniel E. White and Rhonda Sigrist Woodard of Woodard & White, PC, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee Mother: Mary T. Parsons of Parsons & Cameron, PC, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Facts/Discussion: Father appealed from the child custody provisions of a decree and a clarified decree entered in the parties’ divorce action.

The Court focused on three areas of analysis: First, a decision letter does not constitute a judicial determination which may be considered a final order. The trial ended in April 2007 and in September 2007, the district court issued a decision letter. The living circumstances of the parties changed between then and October 2008 when the district court entered the decree in the matter. During the interim, among other motions, Father had filed a motion for reconsideration of its decision not to forbid contact between Child and Mother’s boyfriend (TM.) The Court noted the district court was free to revise its rulings prior to judgment and could have heard the pre-judgment motion to reconsider. Secondly, the circumstances that existed at the time of trial no longer existed at the time the decree was entered. The primary issue of concern – TM’s contact with Mother and Child - was exactly the opposite of what the trial testimony said it would be. Third, the district court ordered a shared custody arrangement be set in place despite the lack of evidence that the parents in the instant case could make a success of shared custody. In addition, the record did not show that a comprehensive evaluation had occurred prior to determining custody.

Conclusion: The district court abused its discretion by entering a decree containing child custody provisions that were not in the best interest of the child.

Reversed and remanded.

C.J. Voigt delivered the decision.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/dmtcrn .

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. Please note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]