Bruegman v. Bruegman

Wyoming Supreme Court
417 P.3d 157 (2018)

ELI5:

Rule of Law:

In child custody determinations, there is no presumption against shared custody; it must be considered on an equal footing with other custody arrangements, guided solely by the best interests of the child. A custody order may properly include a future, automatic change in the arrangement, such as a shift from shared to primary custody when a child begins school, to accommodate the child's developmental needs.

Facts:

Holly Bruegman (Mother) and Colton Bruegman (Father) married in 2008 and had a child in the spring of 2014.
After the child's birth, Mother became a stay-at-home parent, while Father was self-employed, first in the oil and gas industry and later as a rancher.
The couple experienced marital difficulties, separated in September 2014, and had a tumultuous relationship with frequent arguments, some of which Mother recorded on video.
During their separations, the parties lived in different Wyoming towns (Cheyenne and Wheatland) and operated under various temporary shared custody arrangements.
Their child was diagnosed with cognitive and communication developmental delays, requiring an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and specialized services.
Father had a large, local extended family and support system in Wheatland.
Mother's family lived out of state in Nebraska, and her close friend and babysitter in Cheyenne planned to move.
At the time of trial, Mother was newly employed as a realtor in Cheyenne, while Father was established as a self-employed rancher in Wheatland.

Procedural Posture:

Holly Bruegman (Mother) filed a complaint for divorce from Colton Bruegman (Father) in the district court.
Following a hearing on temporary matters, the district court entered an order for the parties to share temporary physical custody on a week-to-week basis.
The district court bifurcated the proceedings, entering a decree of divorce dissolving the marriage while reserving all other issues for a later trial.
After a full bench trial, the district court issued a final order on May 22, 2017, granting the parties shared legal and physical custody until their child enters kindergarten.
The final order provided that upon the child entering kindergarten, Father would be awarded primary physical custody and Mother would have liberal visitation.
Mother, as the appellant, filed a timely notice of appeal from the district court's final custody order to the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does a district court abuse its discretion by ordering a shared physical custody arrangement that automatically converts to primary physical custody for one parent when the child begins school, thereby overturning prior state precedent that disfavored shared custody?

Opinions:

Majority - Lavery, District Judge

No. A district court does not abuse its discretion by ordering shared custody or by including a provision for an automatic future modification based on the child's age. The court explicitly overrules its prior precedent that disfavored shared custody arrangements, holding that such a presumption is archaic and inconsistent with the statutory directive to craft custody based on the best interests of the children. Shared custody must be considered on an equal footing with other custody options. Here, the district court reasonably concluded that shared custody was in the child's best interest after carefully weighing all statutory factors, including the child's special needs, the parents' fitness, and the child's close bond with both parents. Furthermore, the automatic shift to primary custody for Father when the child starts school is not an improper anticipatory modification; rather, it is a prudent and permissible way for the court to create a long-term, stable plan that accommodates the child's changing developmental needs.

Analysis:

This decision marks a significant shift in Wyoming family law by formally abandoning the judicial presumption against shared child custody. By overruling precedent, the court aligns Wyoming with the modern trend that views shared custody as a viable and often beneficial option, rather than an 'unconventional' one requiring special justification. This change will likely lead to more frequent awards of shared custody, as trial courts are now free to consider it on a level playing field with sole custody, focusing purely on the multi-factor 'best interests of the child' test. The ruling also solidifies that courts can and should create long-term custody plans that anticipate developmental milestones, providing more predictability for families and potentially reducing future litigation.

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: Bruegman v. Bruegman (2018)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"