Justia Idaho Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

After conducting an informal custody trial and granting the parties' divorce, a magistrate judge awarded the parties joint legal custody of their two minor children. Primary physical custody was awarded to their father Respondent Jimmy Schneider, subject to visitation rights awarded to their mother, Appellant Dorothy Schneider. Mrs. Schneider appealed that decision arguing that the magistrate judge's findings that her use of medications affected her ability to parent. Furthermore, Mrs. Schneider argued the magistrate abused its discretion in ordering visitation for Mrs. Schneider on certain mornings in the father's home. Upon review of the trial court record, the Supreme Court found substantial and competent evidence to support the magistrate judge's decisions. The Court affirmed the magistrate's award of primary physical custody to the father. However, the Court found the magistrate judge abused its discretion in granting Mrs. Schneider the right to care for the children in the father's home on certain mornings. The Court remanded the case back to the magistrate level for further proceedings on reasonable visitation. View "Schneider v. Schneider" on Justia Law

Respondent John Doe appealed a magistrate court's judgment that terminated his parental rights to his three minor children. The magistrate court found that Respondent neglected his children by failing to provide them with proper parental care. The court found it to be in the children's best interests to terminate his parental rights because, though there was a bond between the father and children, the children needed a stable environment that the father could not provide. On appeal, the father challenged the sufficiency of the evidence presented to support the termination of his parental rights. Upon careful consideration of the magistrate court record, the Supreme Court found substantial and competent evidence that the judgment was in the best interest of the children. The Court affirmed the magistrate court's judgment. View "Idaho Dept. of Health & Welfare v. Doe" on Justia Law

Plaintiff-Respondent Jeconiah Evans and Defendant-Appellant Jessica Sayler divorced in 2007. They agreed to a joint custody agreement for their two children. Ms. Sayler decided she would go to college and stipulated to a modification of the custody agreement that gave Mr. Evans primary custody of the children. The magistrate court amended the custody order. However, after moving to Washington State, Ms. Sayler did not go back to school and petitioned the court for another change in the custody agreement. The judge held that Ms. Sayler’s decision not to go to college did not constitute a "substantial, material and permanent change" that would warrant another change in custody for the "best interests of the children." On appeal to the Supreme Court, Ms. Sayler argued that the magistrate court abused its discretion by not modifying the custody order. Upon review, the Supreme Court affirmed the magistrate court. The Court found that the magistrate judge’s analysis of Ms. Sayler’s case was consistent with state law, and supported by substantial and competent evidence and was "reached through an exercise of reason." View "Evans v. Sayler" on Justia Law