Family Law Supervised visitation: LANE V. CAUDILL-LANE (COA 8/31/2007)

LANE V. CAUDILL-LANE
FAMILY LAW: VISITATION
2006-CA-002436
PUBLISHED: AFFIRMING IN PART, REVERSING IN PART, AND REMANDING
PANEL: ACREE PRESIDING; COMBS, HENRY CONCUR
DATE RENDERED: 8/31/2007

William appeals an Order of Greenup Circuit Court awarding sole custody to Leighanna, limiting his visitation to 28 hours of supervised visits and an award of attorney’s fees.  CA held that William’s viewing pornographic images on the internet and TV did not rise to the level of affecting his relationship with his son and was error to use as a factor in determining custody BUT other factors such as William working full time (Leighanna is not) and that Leighanna was and is the primary caregiver as well as the mutual animosity between the two resulted in the award of sole custody to not be clearly erroneous.  The trial court did err by ordering only 28 hours of supervised visitation when there was not finding s of fact that William’s behavior would seriously endanger the child.  The award of attorneys fees is within the discretion of the court.

By Paul O’Bryan
O’Bryan & Denbow

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are inappropriate, offensive or off-topic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.