Opinion ID: 2514713
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: issues

Text: [¶ 2] Ms. Testerman lists five issues for our consideration: 1. Did the district court abuse its discretion when, having found that it was in the child's best interests for her mother to have primary residential custody, it disregarded that finding to implement a parenting time arrangement which is the functional equivalent of joint residential custody? 2. Did the district court abuse its discretion by implementing a parenting plan which conditioned Ms. Testerman's custodial status on her continued residence in Laramie County? 3. Did the district court abuse its discretion in ordering an automatic, anticipatory alternating joint residential custody modification when the child enters the first grade in the absence of evidence or findings that prospectively modifying Ms. Testerman's primary residential custody to joint custody is in the child's best interests? 4. Did the district court abuse its discretion by ordering an automatic future custody modification, without requiring a change of circumstances which affects the child's best interests in her current living arrangement, and without notice and opportunity to be heard? 5. Did the district court abuse its discretion by reaching beyond the record to devise a parenting plan based on an unidentified Arizona Parenting Plan in the absence of supporting evidence that such plan was in the best interests of the minor child and without prior notice and opportunity to challenge the applicability of the plan to the custody issues in this case?