Court Opinion

ID: 9673938
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:20:48.512753+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:06:35.695095
License: Public Domain

WINTERSHEIMER, Justice,
concurring.
I concur with the result achieved by the majority opinion but I wish to state my reasons separately.
The Court of Appeals should be affirmed because the trial court adopted the proper standard in determining that the husband had failed to meet his burden of proof. His evidence was unconvincing that there was a present danger sufficient to require a change in custody. A reviewing court cannot substitute its view for those of the trial court in the absence of clear error or an abuse of discretion. Neither factor is present here. Reichle v. Reickle, Ky., 719 S.W.2d 442 (1986).
The concept of best interest of the child is fundamental in any consideration of custody. There is no conflict in the application of KRS 403.340 and the best interest of the child philosophy. Here it is abundantly clear that it would be in the best interest of the child for the parents to reduce the tensions in the child’s life.