In Re Marriage of Millikin v. Millikin
Standard for change in custody is necessity, because current conditions are harmful to child(ren).
In Re Marriage of Gould v. Gould
(1) Where custodial parent engages in illicit relationships, the court must show a connection between the relationship and some harm to the child. Parent is not unfit if there is no effect on the children. (2) Also, basing decision on religious affiliation is an abuse of discretion. (3) Change of custody cannot be ordered based on economic, social or academic environment.
In Re Marriage of Thompson v. Thompson
Millikin standard applies to terminate joint custody and award custody solely to one parent.
In Re Marriage of Abel v. Johnson
In a joint custody arrangement, neither party’s rights are superior to the other. If joint custody is terminated, there is an initial award of sole custody, Millikin standard does not apply.
Miller v. Miller
Millikin standard does not apply to motions to change joint custody. Physical placement awards are “basically unenforceable surplusage.”
Marriage of Tieberg v. Ehlke
Higher standard for child does not apply where child’s placement was informally changed.
Marriage of Herrell v. Herrell
“Necessary” standard applies to decision to terminate joint custody. On remand, court should treat case as filed under new law.
Luhman v. Luhman
Stipulation is sufficient for change in custody – no hearing or findings of fact are necessary.
In re Paternity of S.A.
FCC may intervene in post-judgment custody modification stipulation.
In re Paternity of S.R.N.
Since modification was within two years of initial order, trial court erred by focusing on best interests of child instead of necessary-to-modify standard.