Williams v. Williams, et al.
- Jennifer Michelle Williams, Plaintiff and Appellant
Aron Lyle Williams, Defendant and Appellee
State of North Dakota, Statutory Real Party in Interest
- Case Type
- CIVIL APPEAL : CHILD CUST & SUPPORT (Div.\Other)
- Appeal From
Case No. 2019-DM-00911
East Central Judicial District, Cass County
Frank L. Racek
Parties' Statement of Issues
I. Whether the district court erred in failing to state what the material change of circumstances was that occurred to justify modifying the parties’ parenting time schedule.
II. Whether the district court erred in modifying parenting time because no material change in circumstances existed.
III. Whether the district court erred in failing to state with sufficient specificity why modifying the parties’ parenting time schedule was in the children’s best interests.
IV. Whether the district court erred in modifying parenting time because modification was not in the children’s best interests.
V. Whether the district court erred in failing to state what good cause existed to terminate the parenting coordinator.
VI. Whether the district court erred in terminating the parenting coordinator because good cause for the termination did not exist.
VII. Whether the district court erred in deleting the “Right of First Refusal” when the issue was not before the Court on request of either party.
I. The DistrictCourt made sufficient Findings to suppo1t its' decision with regard to its modification of parenting time.
II. The District Court's modification of parenting time was in the children's best interests.
III. The Appellant conceded that a material change of circumstances, as she motioned for a modification of joint legal decision making, and for other changes, including changes of parenting time.
IV. The District Court's termination of the parenting coordinator was proper in its determination.
V. The District Court had the authority to remove the "Right of First Refusal" provision based on judicial discretion and the Plaintiff/ Appellant motioned "for such other and further relief as the Court deems just and equitable."
Jennifer Williams appeals from an amended divorce judgment.
The parties share two minor children. They filed competing motions for contempt and to amend the divorce judgment. The district court denied the motions for contempt and entered an amended judgment modifying parenting time, terminating a parenting coordinator, and removing a provision allowing each parent the first option to care for the children when the other parent cannot exercise his or her overnight parenting time.
On appeal, Jennifer Williams argues the district court did not make the findings required to support a modification of parenting time and there is no evidence of a material change in circumstances. She also argues there was not good cause to terminate the parenting coordinator and her due process rights were violated when the court removed the option provision because neither party raised it as an issue.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
|Seq. #||Filing Date||Description||Attachment|
|1||01/15/2021||NOTICE OF APPEAL : 01/15/2021|
|2||01/15/2021||ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT : 02/03/2021|
|3||01/21/2021||Rec'd $125.00 Filing Fee|
|4||01/26/2021||NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV.|
|5||01/26/2021||Notice Served on Jessica L. Moen, Leslie J. Aldrich and Janet K. Naumann|
|6||02/17/2021||ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED FEBRUARY 16, 2021 (ENTRY NOS. 1-421, 424-436, 438-587, 589 -1160)|
|7||02/17/2021||(NOT REC'D - 422-423, 437, 588)|
|8||02/18/2021||AMENDED ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED FEB. 17, 2021(ENTRY NOS.1-420, 424-436, 438-587, 589 -1161)|
|9||02/18/2021||(NOT REC'D - 421-423, 437, 588)|
|10||03/03/2021||ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT DATED OCTOBER 6, 2020|
|11||03/03/2021||ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT DATED NOVEMBER 2, 2020|
|12||03/03/2021||Transcript Certificate of Service|
|13||03/03/2021||ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT DATED NOVEMBER 18, 2020|
|14||03/03/2021||ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPTS DATED 10/6/20, 11/2/20, 11/18/20 REDACTION KEY|
|15||03/03/2021||Transcript Certificate of Service|
|17||04/12/2021||Oral Argument Request by Appellant|
|19||04/13/2021||Notice from the State that they will not be participating in the appeal|
|20||04/15/2021||Rec'd 5 copies of ATB and 4 copies of ATA back from CD|
|21||04/16/2021||ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED APRIL 15, 2021 (ENTRY NOS. 1162-1179 )|
|22||05/04/2021||ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED MAY 3, 2021 (ENTRY NOS. 1180-1186)|
|23||05/05/2021||Rec'd $59.00 for 118 pages over 100 in ATA (receipt #28131)|
|25||05/12/2021||Oral Argument Request by Appellee|
|27||05/12/2021||ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED MAY 11, 2021 (ENTRY NOS. 1187- 1194)|
|28||05/13/2021||Rec'd additional Certificate of Service on J. Naumann|
|29||05/14/2021||Rec'd 4 copies of AEB and AEA back from CD|
|30||05/18/2021||NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT|
|32||05/27/2021||Rec'd 4 copies of RYB back from CSD|
|33||06/10/2021||APPEARANCES: Jessica L. Moen; Leslie J. Aldrich|
|34||06/10/2021||ARGUED: Jessica L. Moen; Leslie J. Aldrich|
|35||06/10/2021||ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|