In 2009, a decision was reached by the New Hampshire Supreme
Court In
the Matter of Muchmore and Jaycox. The decision was based on the
modification of parenting plan statute, titled RSA
461-A:11. At the time Muchmore was decided, the statute provided
that only a substantial change in circumstances could justify a change to the
parenting plan. In Muchmore, the father petitioned for a change in the
parenting plan because it was in the best interests, he posited, of the minor
child. The lower Court decided that a modification was appropriate, and granted
his request. Our New Hampshire Supreme Court reversed, citing a strict
application of the statute. The result was frustration by legal minds around New Hampshire , as the
bar to hurdle for a modification was set too high.
In the
decision, the Court insinuates that they have no other choice but to apply the
statute as written. Thus, the Court seemed to be saying, that the New Hampshire
legislature must reexamine the statute. That is exactly what the legislature
did.
Over the past
few months, the new version of RSA 461-A:11 has been in place. The changes made
allows for minimal changes now, which was not present before. For instance, if
the transportation location isn’t working for one party, the minimal change
provision allows for a modification of this provision. This is important, as
there are often subtle small changes that need to be made that helps all
parties involved. The Court also included some language in the statutes that
allows the Court to consider the best interests of the child in the context of
the statute. The result has been a much smoother process, and it demonstrates
that sometimes our legislature and Court system gets it right.
If you find
yourself in need of a modification, contact the experienced
lawyers at Parnell & McKay.
No comments:
Post a Comment