Title: GILBERT v GILBERT

State: montana

Issuer: Montana Supreme Court

Document:

No. 12859 I N T H E SUPREME COURT O F THE STATE OF M O N T A N A 1974 P A M E L A A. GILBERT, P l a i n t i f f and Respondent, -vs - WILLIAM E. GILBERT, Defendant and Appellant. Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Sixth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Honorable Nat Allen, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record : For Appellant : Berger, Anderson, S i n c l a i r & Murphy, B i l l i n g s , Montana Arnold A. Berger argued, B i l l i n g s , Montana Brown and G i l b e r t , Bozeman, Montana Gene I. Brown argued, Bozeman, Montana For Respondent : Huppert and Swindlehurst, Livingston, Montana Joseph T. Swindlehurst argued, Livingston, Montana Submitted: November 21, 1974 Decided: TeB 1 3 1975 Filed : kB A 8 L$,f!S M r . J u s t i c e Gene B. Daly delivered t h e Opinion of t h e Court. This i s an appeal by defendant-father from a judgment dated August 7, 1974, of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , Park County, denv- ing h i s p e t i t i o n f o r a l e g a l change of custody from t h e mother. The p a r t i e s were married approximately seven and one half years and a t t h e time of t h e divorce on April 4 , 1972, t h e r e was one i s s u e of t h e marriage a daughter Whitney, age 3 years. The p a r t i e s entered i n t o a voluntary property settlement and custody agreement and t h i s agreement was f i l e d with t h e c o u r t and made a p a r t of t h e judgment which was granted by d e f a u l t t o p l a i n t i f f - wife. Custody of t h e minor c h i l d was placed with t h e mother and provided l i b e r a l v i s i t a t i o n t o t h e f a t h e r ; with two months t e m - porary custody t o t h e f a t h e r during t h e summer months of June, J u l y and August each year, with t h e same l i b e r a l v i s i t a t i o n p r i v i l e g e s t o t h e mother during t h e f a t h e r ' s custody. I n a d d i t i o n , t h e r e were provisions f o r custody on holidays. I n t h e summer 1972, t h e c h i l d resided with t h e mother who was attending summer school i n Bozeman. The mother allowed t h e f a t h e r , who a l s o l i v e d i n Bozeman, frequent v i s i t a t i o n . I n t h e f a l l 1972, t h e mother moved t o Gardiner, Montana t o t a k e a teaching position. During t h e f o o t b a l l season whenever t h e Bobcats had a home game, t h e mother brought t h e c h i l d t o Bozeman and allowed her t o s t a y with t h e f a t h e r f o r t h e weekend. During t h a t school year, t h e f a t h e r traveled t o Gardiner two o r t h r e e t i m e s t o v i s i t t h e c h i l d . I n t h e summer 1973, t h e c h i l d resided with t h e f a t h e r f o r approximately two months a s provided i n t h e divorce decree. She then accompanied her mother t o Iowa f o r two o r t h r e e weeks t o v i s i t her maternal grandparents. During t h i s t i m e both parents had become concerned about t h e c h i l d . She had become q u i t e shy around people and seemed t o be having emotional troubles which were not improving, but r a t h e r seemed t o be g e t t i n g o u t of hand. After consulting with profes- s i o n a l people and t h e University School o f f i c i a l s , both parents agreed i n September 1973, t h a t t h e c h i l d should s t a y with t h e f a t h e r i n Bozeman and a t t e n d t h e c h i l d development c e n t e r spon- sored by Montana S t a t e University. This program i s b a s i c a l l y a nursery school designed t o teach young c h i l d r e n t o r e l a t e with other children. The c h i l d was enrolled i n t h e school and d i d very well. A t t h e end of f a l l q u a r t e r , t h e mother wanted t h e c h i l d back but allowed her t o continue i n t h e school a f t e r t a l k i n g t o her teacher who encouraged t h e mother t o keep t h e c h i l d i n t h e school. The mother again attempted t o g e t t h e c h i l d back a t t h e end of winter q u a r t e r , but gave up a f t e r being threatened with l e g a l a c t i o n by t h e f a t h e r . I n May 1974, t h e f a t h e r p e t i - tioned f o r t h e custody of h i s daughter, Whitney. The c o u r t re- fused t o award him custody. A t t h e end of t h e school t e r m , t h e mother was served with a r e s t r a i n i n g order issued t o prevent her from gaining custody u n t i l t h e i n s t a n t appeal was completed. The mother remarried on June 15, 1974. H e r husband is a F a c i l i t i e s Planning Engineer with Mountain B e l l Telephone Com- pany, permanently assigned t o Cheyenne, Wyoming. The couple has purchased a two bedroom home. The new husband's earnings a r e $14,500 per annum. He has t h r e e c h i l d r e n by a previous marriage and pays $225 per month c h i l d support. O n appeal, t h e f a t h e r challenges t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y of s e c t i o n 91-4515(2), R.C.M. 1947, which provides i n essence t h a t a c h i l d of tender years, everything e l s e being equal between t h e two parents, should be awarded t o t h e mother. He a l s o a t t a c k s s e c t i o n 21-137, R.C.M. 1947, a s unconstitutional. That s e c t i o n provides t h e wife may be awarded a t t o r n e y f e e s from t h e husband. There i s no l i k e provision f o r t h e husband. The f a t h e r contends t h a t both s t a t u t e s discriminate on t h e b a s i s of sex i n v i o l a t i o n of A r t i c l e 11, Sec. 4 , 1 9 7 2 Montana Constitution and t h e F i f t h and Fourteenth Amendments t o t h e United S t a t e s Constitution. The c o n s t i t u t i o n a l questions presented f o r review w e r e not r a i s e d i n t h e t r i a l c o u r t and were not c e r t i f i e d t o t h i s Court a s is required by Rule 38, M.R.App.Civ.P., therefore t h e r e w a s no n o t i c e t o t h e attorney general. The attorney general must be given an opportunity under Rule 38 t o appear i n defense of l e g i s - l a t i v e a c t s which a r e challenged on c o n s t i t u t i o n a l grounds. The f a t h e r ' s f i n a l i s s u e i s "Did t h e t r i a l judge abuse h i s d i s c r e t i o n i n f a i l i n g t o modify t h e decree of divorce t o award custody of t h e minor c h i l d of t h e p a r t i e s t o defendant husband?" The f a t h e r argues t h e r e has been a s i g n i f i c a n t change of circumstances since t h e o r i g i n a l divorce decree which warrants t h e change of custody of Whitney from t h e mother t o t h e f a t h e r . How- ever, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t i n i t s findings of f a c t No. I X s t a t e d : "That t h e r e has been no m a t e r i a l chanse of cir- d cumstances warranting a modification of t h e decree. I' I n i t s conclusion of l a w I, t h e c o u r t s t a t e d : "That no m a t e r i a l change of circumstances e x i s t s t h a t warrant a modification of t h e o r i g i n a l decree, and t h a t it i s f o r t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s of t h e minor c h i l d t h a t she remain i n t h e custody of her mother, s u b j e c t t o t h e v i s i t a t i o n and summer custody on t h e p a r t of her f a t h e r , a s provided i n t h e o r i g i n a l decree." This Court has c o n s i s t e n t l y held t h a t i n custody cases t h e underlying p r i n c i p l e , paramount t o a l l o t h e r s , i s t h e welfare and b e s t i n t e r e s t s of t h e c h i l d and no change i n t h e c h i l d ' s cus- tody w i l l be allowed except where adequate cause t h e r e f o r a r i s e s o u t of a changed condition. That changed circumstances o r con- d i t i o n s a r e based on t h e p r i n c i p l e t h a t s t a b i l i t y of home l i f e of c h i l d r e n i s a v i t a l f a c t o r t o t h e i r well being and t h e turmoil of l i t i g a t i o n must be minimized and somewhere brought t o an end. T h i s Court a l s o recognizes t h e superior p o s i t i o n of t h e t r i a l judge i n such matters and w i l l not d i s t u r b t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s findings unless t h e r e is a mistake of l a w o r a finding of f a c t not supported by c r e d i b l e evidence t h a t would amount t o a c l e a r abuse of d i s c r e t i o n . Bayers v. Bayers, 129 Mont. 1, 281 P.2d 506; I n t h e Matter of t h e Adoption of Dwayne Biery, a Minor Child, Mont . - - , 522 P.2d 1377, 1378, 31 St.Rep. 458. It i s uncontradicted i n t h e record t h a t a f t e r t h e f i r s t year under t h e o r i g i n a l custody agreement t h e c h i l d became emo- t i o n a l l y ill. The p a r t i e s recognized t h i s change of condition and physical custody was given t o t h e f a t h e r a t t h a t time t o serve t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t of t h i s c h i l d . Disregarding t h e s t a t e d inten- t i o n s of t h e p a r t i e s a t t h a t time and only considering t h e n a t u r a l consequences of t h e i r a c t s , we view the s i t u a t i o n s o l e l y from t h e point of view of t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s of t h i s c h i l d . physical custody of t h i s c h i l d i n its present environment is a f a c t and has been f o r a long period of t i m e , when viewed i n t h e l i g h t of t h e formative years of a four year o l d c h i l d a t t h e time she came i n t o t h e present environment a f t e r an unsuccessful one year from age t h r e e t o four years i n t h e f i r s t agreed custody arrangement. This c h i l d w i l l be s i x years old on March 16, 1975. There a r e no a l l e g a t i o n s of u n f i t n e s s o r t h e l i k e before t h i s Court. The change of custody i s agreed t o have been success- f u l i n so f a r as t h e emotional h e a l t h of t h e c h i l d was concerned. There i s no c o n f l i c t on t h i s point. There i s testimony i n t h e record from seven people, o t h e r than t h e p a r t i e s , who appear t o have been f r i e n d s of both of t h e p a r t i e s and have observed t h e present environment. They a l l agree t o t h e high q u a l i t y of t h e present custody environment and t h e healthy emotional e f f e c t it has had on t h e c h i l d . The r e t u r n of physical custody t o t h e mother i s based primarily on t h e maternal d e s i r e and love f o r t h e c h i l d which i s no doubt genuine and sincere. The mother has remarried t o a man who has a responsible position o u t of t h e s t a t e of Montana and is paying support f o r h i s own children by a p r i o r marriage. The step-father d i d not appear i n c o u r t , so t h a t any evaluation could be made by t h e t r i a l c o u r t concerning t h e understanding and willingness o r q u a l i f i c a t i o n s he might have t o assume t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s t h a t would attend t h e moving of t h i s c h i l d who has formed strong emotional ties with her own f a t h e r . A s t h i s Court s a i d i n Biery: "Directing our a t t e n t i o n t o t h e f i r s t i s s u e , w e note t h a t t h i s Court has c o n s i s t e n t l y looked t o t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s of t h e c h i l d i n determining custody. [Citing cases] I n awarding t h e custody of a minor, s e c t i o n 91-4515(1) s p e c i f i c a l l y pro- vides t h a t t h e c o u r t i s t o be guided: "'By what appears t o be f o r t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s of t h e c h i l d i n respect t o its temporal and i t s mental and moral welfare * * * ' "The p a r e n t ' s r i g h t t o t h e custody of her minor c h i l d is not an absolute one, even though it be conceded t h a t she i s a f i t and proper person. I n a l l such cases t h e c r u c i a l f a c t o r is t h e c h i l d ' s w e l f a r e , . b o t h m a t e r i a l and psychological, consider- ing i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e t i e s of a f f e c t i o n t h e c h i l d has formed and t h e consequences of breaking those t i e s . * * *" The agreed f a c t s i n t h i s c a s e demonstrate s e v e r a l i n t e r - r e l a t e d changes of condition t h a t would warrant consideration by t h e c o u r t , inasmuch a s they bear d i r e c t l y on t h e welfare of t h i s c h i l d , and t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' i s holding t h a t none e x i s t w a s e r r o r . I n view of t h e h i s t o r y of t h i s c h i l d and t h e emotional problems t h a t have so r e c e n t l y j u s t begun t o disappear i n t h e present environment, we f e e l t h a t t o uproot her again and place her i n a strange home i n another c i t y , with a step-father who is unknown t o t h e c h i l d o r t o t h e c o u r t , a s it r e l a t e s t o h i s r o l e as a f a t h e r , could have an extremely detrimental e f f e c t on t h e c h i l d . The record before t h i s Court w i l l n o t j u s t i f y t h e uprooting of t h e c h i l d from t h e s e c u r i t y she now f e e l s and place her i n an environment of which t h i s Court i s unsure. The judgment of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t is reversed and t h e cause remanded t o t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t t o place l e g a l custody i n t h e f a t h e r and provide t h e mother with v i s i t a t i o n r i g h t s equivalent t o those enjoyed by t h e f a t h e r i n t h e o 1 decree of divorce. J u s t i c e . , W e concur: Chief J u s t i c e J u s t i c e s