Case Title: Semler v. Semler

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: wyoming

Court: Wyoming Supreme Court

Date: 1996-10-09T00:00:00Z

Document:
Semler v. Semler1996 WY 135924 P.2d 422Case Number: 95-276Decided: 10/09/1996Supreme Court of Wyoming
Elizabeth Lee SEMLER, n/k/a Elizabeth Lee 
Christofferson,

 Appellant 
(Defendant),

v.

James Dale 
SEMLER,

 Appellee (Plaintiff).

Appeal from District 
Court, Sheridan County, Gary P. Hartman, J.

Robert A. 
Hampe*, Cheyenne, for appellant.

Robert W. 
Connor, Jr., and Debra J. Wendtland, Sheridan, for appellee.

* Counsel withdrew, 
appellant pro se as of April 23, 1996.

Before 
TAYLOR, C.J., and THOMAS, MACY, GOLDEN and LEHMAN, JJ.

GOLDEN, Justice.

[¶1]      Elizabeth Lee 
Christofferson, the mother, appeals the district court's decision denying her 
petition for change of custody based on her allegations of sexual abuse 
perpetrated against her two children by their custodial father and step-mother. 
We affirm.

[¶2]      The parties, 
Elizabeth Lee Christofferson (mother) and James Dale Semler (father), present 
only one issue:

Whether the trial court 
abused its discretion in finding the allegations of sexual abuse were without 
merit?

FACTS

[¶3]      The parties were 
divorced in July of 1989, settling all issues except child custody and support. 
On October 5, 1989, an order was entered awarding the father with primary 
custody of the parties' two children, a son and a daughter. The daughter was 
born in 1985; the son was born in 1987. In 1993, the district court heard the 
mother's allegations that the father was physically abusing the children. The 
court found that the risk to the children was minimal and that the mother failed 
to show a substantial change of circumstances. The father continued to have 
primary custody of the children.

[¶4]      During the 
scheduled summer visitation with the mother in 1994, the mother petitioned the 
district court to award her primary custody of the children, based on 
allegations that the father and his wife were sexually abusing the children. 
After six days of testimony, the district court issued a very detailed decision 
letter. Later, the district court entered an order denying the mother's 
petition, incorporating the findings and conclusions from its decision letter. 
In its order, the district court found that the children reported same-sex 
showers with the father and the step-mother, the father had "soaped up" the 
daughter and touched her vaginal area, and both children reported that the 
father toweled off the children after bathing, including the son's penis and the 
daughter's vaginal area.

[¶5]      The district 
court then proceeded to provide a detailed summary of the testimony from the 
witnesses. The testimony included opinions that some of the activities reported 
by the children constituted sexual abuse, the children suffered from low 
self-esteem and severe post traumatic stress disorder and statements from the 
mother and her husband. The court also summarized testimony of opinions that 
previous penetration of the daughter was "doubtful," that the evidence was not 
sufficient to show sexual abuse and the allegations were not legitimate, and 
evidence which questioned the credibility of the mother's experts.

[¶6]      Based on the 
testimony it heard and its findings of fact, the district court concluded that 
the allegations of sexual abuse were without merit and the mother did not prove 
a substantial change of circumstances which would justify modification of child 
custody. This appeal followed.

DISCUSSION

[¶7]      "This court has 
always recognized that the trial court exercises a broad discretion in the 
execution of its revisory powers in matters involving domestic relations." 
Gaines v. Doby, 794 P.2d 566, 570 (Wyo. 1990) (citing Ayling v. Ayling, 661 P.2d 1054, 1056 (Wyo. 1983); Henson v. Henson, 384 P.2d 721, 723 (Wyo. 1963)). We 
will not interfere with the trial court's decision absent a procedural error or 
a clear abuse of discretion. Gaines, 794 P.2d  at 570. The party seeking 
modification of a divorce decree's child custody provisions must prove that a 
material and substantial change in circumstances warranting modification of the 
decree has occurred, after the entry of the initial decree, and that 
modification is in the best interest of the children. Ready v. Ready, 906 P.2d 382, 384-85 (Wyo. 1995) (quoting DJG v. MAP, 883 P.2d 946, 947 (Wyo. 1994)). On 
review, we examine the record to determine whether the trial court could 
reasonably conclude as it did. Ready, 906 P.2d  at 384-85 (quoting DJG, 883 P.2d 
at 947).

[¶8]      In her brief, 
much of the mother's argument concerns the credibility of the witnesses and the 
weight to be given to their testimony. These matters are resolved by the trier 
of fact, not an appellate court. Deen v. Deen, 774 P.2d 621, 622 (Wyo. 1989). 
The district court's findings of fact are very detailed and summarize testimony 
from each witness. After six days of testimony in this hotly contested custody 
battle, the district court found the allegations of sexual abuse were without 
merit. Based on the evidence in the record, the district court could reasonably 
conclude as it did. Therefore, it did not abuse its discretion.

[¶9]      Finally, we find 
we must comment on the mother's brief and admonish counsel. In his brief, 
counsel makes several inappropriate comments concerning the trial court's 
objectivity in violation of Wyoming's Rules of Professional Conduct. WYO. R. 
PROF. CONDUCT 8.2. We warn counsel to refrain from making such inappropriate 
comments in the future.

CONCLUSION

[¶10]   The district court did not abuse 
its discretion in denying the mother's petition for change of custody. Based on 
the evidence in the record, the decision was reasonable. Therefore, we affirm. 
We decline to certify there was no reasonable cause for appeal pursuant to WYO. 
R.APP. P. 10.05.