State ex rel. Slingsby v. Oxford

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionPDF versionPDF version

State ex rel. Slingsby v. Oxford

Case Number
A-16-1170
Court Number
Buffalo
Call Date
September 14, 2017
Case Time
9:30 AM
Case Summary

A-16-1170, State ex rel. Jessie M. Slingsby n/k/a Jessie M. Watts (appellant) v. Devin W. Oxford

Buffalo County, District Judge John H. Marsh

Attorney for Appellant: Nathan T. Bruner (Bruner Frank, L.L.C.)

Attorney for Appellee: Michael S. Borders (Borders Law Office)

Civil Action: Modification of Custody

Action Taken by Trial Court: The district court modified custody so that the 15 year old child primarily lived with his father instead of his mother.

Assignments of Error on Appeal:   Jessie assigns that the district court abused its discretion by modifying its prior orders to award joint custody with the minor child’s primary residence with Devin.

Extended Case Summary

A-16-1170, State ex rel. Jessie M. Slingsby n/k/a Jessie M. Watts (appellant) v. Devin W. Oxford

Original Trial Court: District Court for Buffalo County, Judge John H. Marsh

Attorneys: Nathan T. Bruner (Bruner Frank, L.L.C.) (for appellant mother); Michael S. Borders (Borders Law Office) (for appellee father)

Civil Action: Modification of Custody

Background: Hunter was born in 2001. His parents were never married. His mother was awarded primary custody of Hunter in 2002. In 2006, his father was given specific parenting time of every other weekend and one month in the summer.

In May 2016, the father filed an application to modify custody, seeking physical custody of Hunter. The primary material change in circumstances alleged by the father was that Hunter wished to live with him. Hunter was 15 at the time of the proceedings.

At trial, evidence showed that Hunter has a great relationship with his mother, her husband, and step siblings, but struggles in school and would prefer to be in a smaller school, like Ansley, where his father lives. Hunter is also very interested in agriculture and outdoor activities, which are more available with his father.

The court ultimately found Hunter’s wishes persuasive and awarded joint legal custody, but awarded the father physical custody of Hunter.

The Nebraska Court of Appeals will consider the following issue raised by the mother in her appellate brief:   

Did the district court abuse its discretion by awarding physical custody of Hunter to his father in this custody modification action?

Case Location
Hastings
Court Type
District Court
Panel Text
Moore, Chief Judge, Bishop, and Arterburn, Judges