No. 83-424 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TISE STATE OF MONTANA 

19 84 

MOLLY STRONG, 

Petitioner and Appellant, 

-vsBILLY RAY WEAVER, 

Respondent and Respondent. 

APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Eleventh Judicial District, 

In and for the County of Flathead, 

The Honorable Flichael Keedy, Judge presiding. 

COUNSEL OF RECORD: 

For Appellant: 

Richard DeJana, Kalispell, Montana 

For Respondent: 

George B. Best, Kalispell, Montana 

-. - 

Submitted on Briefs: April 18, 1984 

Decided: July 23, 1984 

Filed: ' 
Mr. Justice Daniel J. Shea delivered the Opinion of the 

Court. 

Petitioner wife, Molly Strong, appeals an order of the 

Flathead County District Court modifying a previous order 

that had defined the "reasonable visitation" rights of the 

respondent husband, Billy Ray Weaver. The wife had not 

appealed the previous order. The trial court modified the 

previous visitation schedule after it held a contempt hearing 

to determine whether the wife had been denying the husband 

his rights under that previous order. The trial court 

subsequently found the wife in contempt. There was no 

separate visitation hearing, nor was the appealed order 

supported by findings of fact and ~onclusions of law. We 

vacate the appealed order and remand the cause to the 

District Court for a visitation hearing. 

The wife presents only one issue. That is whether the 

trial court had jurisdiction to modify the previous 

visitation order without holding a visitation hearing and 

without entering findings and conclusions that the 

modification was in the "best interest" of the child under 

section 40-4-217 (3) , MCA. 

Custody of the parties' infant child, Anneve, was 

awarded to the wife under the decree of dissolution of 

marriage entered June 21, 1979. At that time, the husband 

was awarded "reasonable (child) visitation" rights. The 

husband was compelled three times to petition the court to 

order visitation because the wife was not providing him with 

"reasonable visitation." On the third time, the husband 

petitioned the court to clarify the terms "reasonable 

visitation" by setting out a specific visitation schedule, 
and the court did so. That visitation schedule was later 

modified by the court after the contempt hearing, granting 

increased visitation rights to the husband, and the wife 

appeals that modification order. 

Section 40-4-217(3), MCA, controls the modification of a 

visitation order. That section provides that the order may 

be modified " . . . whenever (it) would serve the best 

interest of the child;. . . " That section contemplates a 

visitation hearing and a finding that any modification would 

be in the child's "best interest." Further, this ultimate 

finding must be supported by findings and conclusions so that 

the parties are informed of the basis of the court's 

decision, and so that this Court may effective1.y review the 

trial court's determination. Jones v. Jones (Mont. 1980) , 

620 P.2d 850, 37 St.Rep. 1973. Here there was no visitation 

hearing, no finding in the order that the modification was in 

the "best interest" of the child, and no findings and 

conclusions to support the order. 

We vacate the June 13, 1983 visitation order and remand 

this cause for a visitation hearing. Any modification order 

regarding visitation must be supported by findings and 

conclusions. 

We Concur: 

Chief Justice