Court Opinion

ID: 9715786
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 06:14:31.068723+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:38.094921
License: Public Domain

SULLIVAN, Judge,
dissenting.
I dissent insofar as the majority holds that the evidence does not disclose a sufficient substantial change in one or more of the original factors which led to residential placement with Tammy. In my view the evidence does justify the court’s conclusion that there was such a change and further that residential placement with DeWayne would be in the child’s best interest.
The evidence does in fact show that Tammy’s new residence was in a different town and a different school district and that it was not in the former family home but was in the home of her boyfriend’s parents. The evidence further permits the conclusion that the child’s positive identification with friends in the LaPorte neighborhood and school were more conducive to his best interests than residence in Westville and attendance at a new school would be.
In this light, I believe the preservation of joint-custody but transference of residential placement to the father was reasonable under the applicable modification statute. I would affirm.