Title: Connecticut appellant court holds that the trial court’s decision on modifying custody orders was in the best interests of the child. (BY: Amanda N.)

Links for the opinion: http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11085534845205621185&q=+child+custody&hl=en&as_sdt=4,7&as_ylo=2013 http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROap/AP147/147AP129.pdf The Appellate Court of Connecticut held in Baker-Grenier v. Grenier, (AC 34992) (Conn. App. Ct. Jan. 14, 2014) that the trial court had acted well in their discretion in granting the defendant’s motion to modify custody and visitation due to a substantial change in circumstances. The plaintiff, Jodi Baker-Grenier and the defendant, Daniel Grenier, were intermarried February 23, 2005. They are the parents of one child, Anthony, who was born on June 26, 1998. The parties’ marriage was dissolved on March 31, 2009. It was decided that the parties would share legal and physical custody of Anthony and that the defendant would be required to provide child support. On April 15, 2011, the defendant filed the previously mentioned motion to modify custody with the goal of obtaining physical custody of the child with the plaintiff receiving reasonable visitation rights. The defendant also filed for a guardian ad litem for the child. The court appointed a guardian ad litem, who then filed a motion to have the defendant’s motion referred to the Family Relations Office of the Court Support Services Division of the Judicial Branch for an evaluation. The defendant also filed a motion to modify, seeking sole legal custody of the child, which was denied. In the evaluation, the family relations officer recommended that the parties continue to share joint legal custody with the defendant having primary physical custody and the final decision-making authority. The guardian ad litem testified that the plaintiff “harbors too much anger…which affects her dealings with...” the defendant. Based on the evidence at the hearing on the motion and the demeanor and credibility of the parties, the court found it to be in the best interests of the child to reside with the defendant. The court ordered that the parties share joint legal custody of the child with the defendant to have final decision-making authority. The court also issued orders regarding a parenting plan, decision-making responsibilities, miscellaneous parenting plan provisions, child support, the guardian ad litem’s fees and costs, as well as further instructions. The plaintiff appealed afterward. The plaintiff claimed that the court had abused its discretion by finding that there had been a substantial change in circumstances to warrant modification of the existing custody and visitation orders. Her second argument was that the court had abused its discretion by finding that the modification of the custody and visitation orders was in the best interests of the child. The Connecticut Appellant Court found that the trial court had acted well within their discretion when it granted the defendant’s motion to modify custody. They supported their decision with “The trial court has the opportunity to view the parties first hand and is therefore in the best position to assess the circumstances surrounding a dissolution action, in which such personal factors such as the demeanor and attitude of the parties are so significant…” Ford v. Ford, 68 Conn. App. 173, 187–88, 789 A.2d 1104, cert. denied, 260 Conn. 910, 796 A.2d 556 (2002). The Connecticut Appellant Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment.