Why should anyone outside of Nebraska care about the decision in a recent Nebraska Court of Appeals memorandum in Easton v. Easton? Although the Easton case is a memorandum and judgment and is not intended for permanent publication, the decision demonstrates the importance of analyzing behavior rather than simply relying on labels. The appellate court does not put on its “parental alienation” glasses, nor does it seek out psychological labels so often associated with high-conflict custody cases. For this reason, this memorandum opinion deserves review by family law practitioners, custody evaluators, and judges entrusted with decision-making in high-conflict cases.
The underlying case involves a former married couple. Two children were born to or adopted from their marriage. The parents divorced in July 2017 and received joint custody and residency rights for the children through a divorce decree. However, the mother was granted “final decision-making authority for health and medical decisions regarding the children.” Approximately 18 months later, the parties agreed to a change in the parties' regular care time and summer and vacation schedules, which was codified in a court order. The memorandum focuses on a later change.
Comments are closed.