S.D.J., In Interest of
| Decision Date | 30 November 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. A94A2065,A94A2065 |
| Citation | 452 S.E.2d 155,215 Ga.App. 779 |
| Parties | In the Interest of S.D.J., a child. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
J. Russell Phillips, Macon, for appellant.
Lynn F. Haywood, Macon, for appellee.
At the time of their divorce in 1989, Daniel Rayford Joyce and Laura Joyce Woodall incorporated a joint custody agreement into the divorce decree by which they agreed to share joint legal and physical custody of their child. Pursuant to a change of custody petition filed by the mother, the trial court conducted a hearing and entered an order changing primary physical custody of the child to the mother. We granted the father's application for an appeal from the order changing custody.
"Once a permanent child custody award has been entered, the test for use by the trial court in change of custody suits is whether there has been a 'change of conditions affecting the welfare of the child.' " Gazaway v. Brackett, 241 Ga. 127, 128, 244 S.E.2d 238 (1978); Arp v. Hammonds, 200 Ga.App. 715, 716, 409 S.E.2d 275 (1991). Since potential change of custody is always considered in light of the best interests of the child, an order changing custody may be based on evidence of a positive or adverse change in the circumstances of either of the joint custodial parents, or any change in the circumstances of the child substantially affecting the welfare and best interests of the child. Robinson v. Ashmore, 232 Ga. 498, 501-502, 207 S.E.2d 484 (1974).
In its order changing custody, the trial court found that "there has been a material change of conditions since the time of the [divorce decree implementing the joint custody agreement] in that the child is being transferred back and forth between the two parent's homes, under circumstances which cause the child confusion and distress with the frequency of changing homes." 1 The trial court concluded that, under the circumstances, it would be in the best interest of the child for the parents to continue as joint legal custodians but that primary physical custody should be changed so that the child resides with the mother instead of constantly traveling back and forth to reside with the mother and father.
The evidence showed that the child was two-and-one-half years of age when the joint custody agreement took effect and the child began to reside with each parent for a portion of each week. Under this arrangement, the child was shuttled back and forth between the parents and never resided in one place for more than a few days in succession. When the mother brought the present petition, the child was six years old and had entered the first grade and had begun to participate in activities such as the Cub Scouts. There was evidence that, since the child had reached school age, the constant moving of the child from one residence to the other under the terms of the joint custody agreement had resulted in a hectic, burdensome schedule for the child with respect to his school schedule and other activities. For example, the mother and father lived in different school districts and the child attended a school in the father's district. On some school mornings the joint custody agreement required the father to relinquish physical custody of the child to the mother prior to school. To accomplish this, the father would get the child up early and drive him to the mother's residence, where the mother would then get the child ready for school and drive him back to the school near the father's house. There was evidence that the child had begun to suffer from sleep disturbances. Other evidence showed that the joint custody schedule had adversely affected arrangements for the child's medical care in some instances. In addition to evidence that the joint custody agreement had become complicated and unwieldy as the child grew older, there was also evidence that the situation was exacerbated by a recent breakdown in communications between the mother and father.
"Where a change of custody has been awarded because of a material change of conditions affecting the welfare of the child, this court will affirm if there is reasonable evidence to support the decision." Blackburn v. Blackburn, 168 Ga.App. 66, 71, 308 S.E.2d 193 (1983). In making a determination to change custody under this standard, the trial court is vested with a wide discretion which this court will not control absent abuse. Hayes v. Hayes, 199 Ga.App. 132, 133, 404 S.E.2d 276 (1991); Dixon v. Dixon, 183 Ga.App. 756, 757, 360 S.E.2d 8 (1987).
Applying this standard, we find there was reasonable evidence showing that, since the joint custody agreement was entered into in 1989, there has been an adverse change in conditions affecting the welfare of the child. The evidence was sufficient under this test even in the absence of evidence establishing that the adverse conditions affecting the child had a measurable adverse effect on the child. There is no requirement that a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
J.P., In Interest of, A95A2693
...to reversal on appeal absent abuse. See, e.g. Villenueve v. Richbourg, 217 Ga.App. 354, 457 S.E.2d 821 (1995); In the Interest of S.D.J., 215 Ga.App. 779, 452 S.E.2d 155 (1994) and Although the Court in In the Interest of A.L.L., 211 Ga.App. 767(1), 440 S.E.2d 517 (1994), ruled that it had ......
-
Holt v. Leiter
...a change in custody from one parent to another). 17. 200 Ga.App. at 718, 409 S.E.2d 275. 18. Id. 19. See In the Interest of S.D.J., 215 Ga.App. 779, 780, 452 S.E.2d 155 (1994). ...
-
Lewis v. Lewis
...substantially affecting the welfare and best interests of the child." (Citation omitted; emphasis supplied.) In the Interest of S.D.J., 215 Ga.App. 779, 452 S.E.2d 155 (1994). While Georgia courts have found that a move is not necessarily, in and of itself, a sufficient change in condition ......
-
Mahan v. McRae
...the welfare of the child. Gazaway v. Brackett, 241 Ga. 127, 128, 244 S.E.2d 238 (1978)." (Punctuation omitted). In the Interest of S.D.J., 215 Ga.App. 779, 452 S.E.2d 155 (1994). See also OCGA § 19-9-3(a); Arp v. Hammonds, 200 Ga.App. 715, 716, 409 S.E.2d 275 (1991). An award of custody ves......
-
Domestic Relations - Barry B. Mcgough
...354, 457 S.E.2d 821 (1995). 56. Id. at 354, 457 S.E.2d at 822. 57. Id. at 355, 457 S.E.2d at 823. 58. Id. 59. In the Interest of S.D.J., 215 Ga. App. 779, 779-80, 452 S.E.2d 155, 156 (1994). 60. Id. at 780-81, 452 S.E.2d at 157. 61. 217 Ga. App. 368, 457 S.E.2d 575 (1995). 62. Id. at 369, 4......