Title: Wolf v. Wolf, et al.
Citation: 2019 ND 270
Docket Number: 20190166
State: north-dakota
Issuer: north-dakota Supreme Court
Date: November 20, 2019

2019 ND ____ Melissa Rae Wolf n/k/a Melissa Rae Anderson, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Levi Norman Wolf, Defendant and Appellant and State of North Dakota, Statutory Real Party in Interest No. 20190166 Appeal from the District Court of Stark County, Southwest Judicial District, the Honorable Gary H. Lee, Judge. AFFIRMED. Per Curiam. Jennifer Stanley, Minot, N.D., for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief. Haylee Cripe, Dickinson, N.D., for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief. 1 Per Curiam. Levi Wolf appeals the district court’s modification of the allocation of parenting time for the parties’ child. Wolf contends that the court erred in finding there was a material change of circumstances and finding the modification of parenting time was in the best interest of the child. Wolf also contends that the court abused its discretion by denying his motion for continuance. We summarily affirm the district court’s judgment under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4), concluding the court did not abuse its discretion in proceeding with the evidentiary hearing after denying Wolf’s second request to continue the scheduled hearing date. We summarily affirm the finding there was a material change in circumstances and modification of parenting time pursuant to 35.1(a)(2), concluding there is evidence in the record to support the court’s findings and we are not left with a definite and firm conviction a mistake has been made. Wolf v. Wolf, et al. No. 20190166 Per Curiam. [¶1] Levi Wolf appeals the district court’s modification of the allocation of parenting time for the parties’ child. Wolf contends that the court erred in finding there was a material change of circumstances and finding the modification of parenting time was in the best interest of the child. Wolf also contends that the court abused its discretion by denying his motion for continuance. [¶2] We summarily affirm the district court’s judgment under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4), concluding the court did not abuse its discretion in proceeding with the evidentiary hearing after denying Wolf’s second request to continue the scheduled hearing date. We summarily affirm the finding there was a material change in circumstances and modification of parenting time pursuant to 35.1(a)(2), concluding there is evidence in the record to support the court’s findings and we are not left with a definite and firm conviction a mistake has been made. [¶3] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J. Jon J. Jensen Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte