Wilber v. Scaff
- McKiley Wilber, Plaintiff and Appellant
Sarah Scaff, Defendant and Appellee
- Case Type
- CIVIL APPEAL : CHILD CUST & SUPPORT (Div.\Other)
- Appeal From
Case No. 2016-DM-00068
South Central Judicial District, Burleigh County
James S. Hill
Parties' Statement of Issues
1. Whether the District Court’s findings of fact regarding residential responsibility are clearly erroneous because of a misapplication of the law or improper application of the best-interest factors a, b, d, h, and k, as the Court made findings inconsistent with the evidence and testimony presented and misapplied the law.
2. Whether the District Court’s court approved parenting plan is clearly erroneous because of a misapplication of the law regarding transportation and exchange arrangements.
3. Whether the District Court’s findings of fact regarding residential responsibility are clearly erroneous because, based on the entire record, it is clear a mistake has been made in awarding Sarah primary residential responsibility.
Whether the District Court’s determination that the Appellee, Sarah Scaff, should have primary residential responsibility for her child is clearly erroneous.
McKiley Wilber appeals from a district court judgment granting Sarah Scaff primary residential responsibility of their child in common.
Wilber filed for divorce against Scaff in January 2016. After a bench trial in March 2019, the district court granted Scaff primary residential responsibility of their child.
On appeal, Wilber argues the district court’s findings of fact regarding factors a, b, d, h, and k of the best interest factors under N.D.C.C. § 14-09-06.2(1) were clearly erroneous. Scaff argues the findings were not clearly erroneous.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
|Seq. #||Filing Date||Description||Attachment|
|1||06/21/2019||NOTICE OF APPEAL : 06/21/2019|
|2||06/27/2019||ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT : 06/28/2019|
|3||06/27/2019||Rec'd $125.00 filing fee (receipt #27132)|
|4||06/27/2019||NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV.|
|5||06/27/2019||Notice served on Jennifer M. Gooss and Matthew J. Arthurs|
|6||07/23/2019||ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED JULY 22, 2019 (ENTRY NOS. 1-72 AND 74-194) (NOT REC'D #73)|
|7||08/15/2019||ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT DATED MARCH 5, 2019|
|8||08/15/2019||TRANSCRIPT DATED 3-5-19 REDACTION KEY|
|9||08/15/2019||C.O.S. for ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT AND REDACTION KEY DATED MARCH 5, 2019|
|10||09/20/2019||MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF|
|11||09/20/2019||ACTION BY CLERK - Granted : 10/01/2019|
|13||10/01/2019||Oral Argument Request by Appellant|
|15||10/07/2019||Rec'd 6 copies pf ATB and ATA back from Central Duplicating|
|16||10/14/2019||Rec'd $12.50 for 25 additional pages in ATA (receipt #27396)|
|18||11/07/2019||Rec'd non-substantive corrections to AEB|
|19||11/08/2019||Rec'd 6 copies of AEB back from Central Duplicating|
|20||11/18/2019||NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT|
|21||12/02/2019||APPEARANCES: Jennifer M. Gooss; Matthew J. Arthurs|
|22||12/02/2019||ARGUED: Jennifer M. Gooss; Matthew J. Arthurs|
|23||12/02/2019||ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|