Court Opinion

ID: 9569621
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:15:48.910118+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:03:38.574148
License: Public Domain

*40Hannon, Judge,
dissenting.
I must respectfully dissent. If I were the trial judge, I would not have allowed Karla to move to Colorado with Thomas. However, the applicable standard of review is as follows:
Child custody determinations, and visitation determinations, are matters initially entrusted to the discretion of the trial court, and although reviewed de novo on the record, the trial court’s determination will normally be affirmed absent an abuse of discretion. Poll v. Poll, 256 Neb. 46, 588 N.W.2d 583 (1999). A judicial abuse of discretion requires that the reasons or rulings of a trial judge be clearly untenable insofar as they unfairly deprive a litigant of a substantial right and just result. Davidson v. Davidson, 254 Neb. 357, 576 N.W.2d 779 (1998).
(Emphasis supplied.) Farnsworth v. Farnsworth, 257 Neb. 242, 248, 597 N.W.2d 592, 597 (1999).
Untenable is defined as “incapable of being defended, as an argument, thesis, etc.; indefensible.” Webster’s Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language 1567 (1989). I do not think one can say the trial judge’s reasons are “untenable,” let alone “clearly untenable.” I do not think we can say the trial judge abused his discretion in this case. Therefore, I would reluctantly affirm.