Case Title: Coates v. Coates

Citation: 171 Vt. 519, 769 A.2d 1

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 2000-07-07T00:00:00Z

Document:
Coates v. Coates (99-457); 171 Vt. 519; 769 A.2d 1 

[Filed 07-Jul-2000]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                       SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 99-457

                              APRIL TERM, 2000

Katherine M. Coates	               }	APPEALED FROM:
                                       }
                                       }
     v.	                               }	Windham Family Court
                                       }	
                                       }
James D. Coates	                       }	DOCKET NO. 131-7-99Wmfa		
                                                Trial Judge:  William D. Cohen

             In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       Defendant James Coates appeals a Windham Family Court decision
  granting plaintiff Katherine  Coates' application for a final order for
  relief from abuse against defendant, arguing that plaintiff did  not meet
  the burden of proof to prove abuse.  We reverse.

       The following evidence was presented at a hearing on plaintiff's
  application.  The parties were  married in Florida and had a daughter in
  April 1993.  A Florida family court order dissolved the  marriage in May
  1996.   Plaintiff was awarded sole custody of daughter, pursuant to the
  court's  finding that shared parental responsibility would be detrimental
  to daughter as defendant "has a long  history of mental and physical
  problems that would prevent him from meaningful participation in  deciding
  major issues affecting the child's life."  The court also granted
  plaintiff's request to relocate  with daughter to Vermont, but required
  that she provide defendant her address and telephone  number.  Defendant
  was allowed supervised visits with daughter in Vermont, on the condition
  that  he give forty-eight hours notice to plaintiff.  He was also allowed
  telephone communication with  daughter three times a week.

       After plaintiff and daughter relocated to Vermont in 1996, defendant
  called on a weekly basis.   Defendant and plaintiff spoke when he called
  for daughter, and plaintiff listened in on defendant's  conversations with
  daughter without objection from defendant.  Defendant occasionally sent 
  daughter appropriate gifts, and plaintiff assisted daughter in sending
  cards and photographs to  defendant.  

       Sometime in late 1996 or 1997, defendant sent plaintiff and daughter
  three handwritten songs  entitled "Christmas Songs from Hell."  The songs
  contained graphic descriptions of violence and  threats of death and murder
  set to Christmas carol tunes.  Plaintiff testified that these arrived
  without  warning, that they disgusted her, and that she did not share them
  with daughter.  Defendant testified 

 

  that these songs were mere parodies of Christmas carols with macabre
  themes, and that he read them  to plaintiff over the phone and sent them to
  her at her request.  During a telephone call on another  occasion,
  defendant described to daughter the pain and bleeding he experienced when
  he had a tooth  pulled, which plaintiff thought inappropriate for daughter
  to hear.

       In approximately June 1999, defendant informed plaintiff and daughter
  that he was planning to visit  them in Vermont.  Plaintiff testified that
  defendant said that he was going to "take [daughter] for a  ride" and "fix
  things in her house," and that he was going to petition for joint custody
  of daughter.  Plaintiff testified that she was afraid to tell defendant
  that he could not visit her or daughter.  On July  1, 1999, plaintiff
  applied to the Windham Family Court for a temporary relief from abuse order 
  against defendant.  The application was granted and the order served on
  defendant in Florida on July  8, 1999.  

       At an August 27, 1999, hearing, plaintiff requested a permanent relief
  order.  Both plaintiff and  defendant testified and were represented by
  counsel.  In addition to the evidence discussed above, the  court allowed
  plaintiff -- over defendant's objection -- to testify as to physical and
  psychological  abuse she suffered prior to and during their marriage. 
  Plaintiff also testified that defendant similarly  abused daughter.  The
  court allowed the testimony to "put in context the plaintiff's sense of
  fear." 

       In its September 3, 1999, written decision, the court granted
  plaintiff a relief-from-abuse order.  The  court found no abuse against
  daughter and allowed defendant supervised visitation pursuant to 
  conditions in its order.  Defendant appeals, arguing that the court's
  decision was clearly erroneous  because plaintiff did not carry her burden
  of proof alleging abuse.  

       "We note at the outset that when reviewing the factual findings of a
  trial court we view them in the  light most favorable to the prevailing
  party below, disregarding the effect of any modifying evidence,  and we
  will not set aside the findings unless they are clearly erroneous." 
  Stickney v. Stickney, __ Vt.  __, __,