.webp)
As we have discussed many times before on our blog, divorce tends to bring out some of the worst sides in people. This is particularly true when it comes to divorces which involve custody battles. When the marital dissolution involves disputes over children, the emotional intensity can be amplified many times over. When parents fight over custody, courts are put in a very difficult position. Courts aim to do what's best for children, but no judge wants to prevent a parent from being actively involved in their child's life.
In the case of Reichert v. Hornbeck, two lawyers ended up engaging in a prolonged custody battle over their son. Although they had a troubled marriage, they both expressed a desire to be proactively involved in the child’s life. The court had to make a difficult judgment. Let’s dive into this case in detail.
Overview of Reichert v. Hornbeck
The couple's paths crossed when the father had recently graduated from law school, while the mother was gearing up to begin her law school journey. The couple dated for three years and then broke up. Then, the couple reunited in 2008 and ended up getting engaged shortly thereafter. Subsequently, the couple moved into a rental house and got married. Then, a son was born in 2009. Their son was born with a collapsed lung and required emergency surgery soon after birth.
The couple’s relationship deteriorated and soon a divorce was sought by both parties. The mother sought sole physical custody and joint legal custody; the father sought joint physical custody and joint legal custody. Although the parties were unable to repair their marriage, both of them expressed a desire to play a positive, proactive role in the life of the child. The court was faced with the difficult question of how to approach this situation which involved a fractured relationship between parties who both wished to be good parents.
Outcome & Discussion
The trial court granted joint physical and joint legal custody, but gave “tie breaking authority” to the mother. Furthermore, the trial court appointed a parent coordinator to facilitate communication between the parents. The father appealed this judgment, as he sought to eliminate the tie breaking authority granted to the mother. In his appeal, the father argued that the trial court abused its discretion when it awarded the mother tie breaking authority because there was no evidence to support this ruling. On review, the appellate division found no evidence of abuse by the trial court.
In its opinion, the appellate division noted that trial courts have very wide latitude when it comes to making child custody determinations, and abuse will only be found in exceptional cases. Part of the reason for this is that the trial court is in the best possible position to evaluate the evidence in the case; the trial court is clearly in the superior position, for instance, to measure the credibility of witnesses and weigh other types of evidence. In this scenario, although the court found evidence that the parties still had a strained relationship among each other, they both expressed a strong desire to play a positive role in the child’s life. What’s more, their actions supported this expressed desire.
Contact the Murphy Law Firm for Additional Resources
If you want to know more about this topic, or another related matter, contact one of the top attorneys at the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-493-9116.
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
