Important Custody Lessons from the Case of Bussell v. Bussell (2010)

In previous posts, we’ve tried to emphasize the importance of the “best interests of the child” standard in the context of child custody determinations. We’ve highlighted the fact that this is the guiding principle which underlies essentially all custody-related matters, including the initial custody arrangement, custody modifications, and so forth. To gain a clearer sense of how this principle operates in reality, we can look to real cases which demonstrate how it has been applied. In this post, we will give a brief summary and discussion of the case of Bussell v. Bussell (2010), a well-known case which involved a somewhat heated custody dispute.

Basic Factual Overview of the Custody Case

The divorce proceedings began in 2002, involving parties married in 1995.  According to the wife’s version of events, the husband had a secret girlfriend, failed to pay specific household bills, and sexually assaulted her daughter from a prior relationship during marriage. The wife was a manager and was not able to financially support herself apart from her husband. The court initially granted the wife pendente lite relief in 3 forms: the wife received sole legal custody and primary physical custody of the couple’s two shared children, the wife received temporary alimony, and she received use of the marital home.The husband argued that the initial court erred in granting the wife primary physical custody, because he claimed that he was the primary caretaker rather than his wife. He also claimed that her past behavior showed that she was unfit to be the primary caretaker. The court found that both parents were fit to be the primary caretaker but upheld the initial decision to grant primary custody to the wife. The primary reason for this decision is that one of the children strongly preferred to be with the mother.

Primary Lesson: The Weight of the Child’s Stated Preference

Although both parents made allegations which, if true, would call into question the other parent’s custodial capabilities, the court simply wasn’t swayed by these allegations. Instead, the trial court found that both parents would make suitable caretakers. Because of this, the court turned to other factors which might tip the scale in one direction or the other. The couple’s youngest son expressed a strong desire to remain with his mother. And the other son stated that he preferred to live with his brother. Given the children's age, the court concluded that these preferences have weight when applying the best interests of the child.Ultimately, the court determined that these stated preferences were sufficient to award primary physical custody to the wife (and mother).This is a good example to show how the best interests of the child standard work in reality. When applying this, the court will take global perspective and consider all factors, including those which may be less visible. In this case, the circumstances of each parent were such that they cant make any obvious choice regarding primary custody. In making its determination, the court relied on the child’s stated preference, which essentially served as a “tiebreaker.” Furthermore, this case shows us how courts will dig through all factors in order to make the proper decision.

Contact The Murphy Law Firm for More Information

If you’d like to learn more, reach out to The Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-493-9116.