Domestic relations – Parenting time – School attendance

Listen to this article

Where a divorced father’s parenting time was reduced, a remand is necessary because it is unclear that the child’s school attendance necessitates a significant reduction in the father’s parenting hours.

“Appellant, Sean Donovan (father), and Appellee, Amy Pawle (mother), were briefly married before divorcing in December 2019. The parties have one child together, who was born about a month after the parties were married. The divorce judgment, which incorporated the parties’ separation agreement dated December 17, 2019, provided for joint legal custody but awarded primary physical custody to the mother. The judgment also provided the father parenting time every Monday morning through Tuesday afternoon, and every Thursday morning through Friday afternoon. No child support was ordered.

“In January 2022, the mother filed complaints for modification and contempt. In response, the father filed a counterclaim for modification the following month. Following a nonconsecutive three-day trial, from October 2022 to February 2023, the judge issued modification and contempt judgments that granted the mother sole legal and physical custody, ordered the father pay retroactive and prospective child support, modified the father’s parenting time, and found the father in contempt of the separation agreement. The father now appeals from both the modification and contempt judgments. We affirm the contempt judgment. With respect to the modification judgment, we vacate so much of the judgment as pertains to the father’s parenting time and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this memorandum and order. The modification judgment is otherwise affirmed. …

“The judge … determined that there was a material change in circumstances sufficient to justify altering the father’s parenting time. For example, the judge found that because the child is now attending school, the child would benefit from a ‘more traditional’ parenting schedule that provides the father with parenting time on alternating weekends as well as afternoon and evening time during the week. However, this new parenting schedule results in an approximate one-third reduction in the father’s parenting hours over a two-week period. While we agree that the judge was justified in altering the father’s parenting schedule in consideration of the child’s need to attend school, the judge’s findings were insufficient to justify such a significant reduction in the father’s total parenting hours. Indeed, while the judge determined that the father is ‘overwhelmingly possessive’ of the child and fails to understand that the child requires separation from each parent to become independent and develop, the judge did not explicitly justify the reduction in parenting time on this basis. … Therefore, because it is unclear that the child’s school attendance necessitates a significant reduction in the father’s parenting hours, we vacate the so much of the modification judgment as it relates to the father’s parenting time, and remand for further findings and a redetermination of the father’s parenting time in light of such further findings. …

“The contempt judgment, dated June 9, 2023, is affirmed. So much of the modification judgment, dated June 9, 2023, as pertains to the father’s parenting time is vacated, and the case is remanded to the Probate and Family Court for further proceedings consistent with this memorandum and order. The modification judgment is otherwise affirmed. The parenting schedule set forth in the modification judgment shall remain in effect as a temporary order during the pendency of the remand unless the judge orders otherwise.”

Pawle v. Donovan (Lawyers Weekly No. 81-131-24) (13 pages) (Docket No. 23-P-1355) (Dec. 5, 2024).

Click here to read the full text of the opinion.