Cole v. Cole

Nebraska Supreme Court

Cole v. Cole

395 N.W.2d 494, 223 Neb. 906, 1986 Neb. LEXIS 1117

CourtNebraska Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 24, 1986

Docket85-678

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 395 N.W.2d 494 (Cole v. Cole) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cole v. Cole, 395 N.W.2d 494, 223 Neb. 906, 1986 Neb. LEXIS 1117 (Neb. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is an appeal from an order modifying the custody provisions of a decree of dissolution of the parties’ marriage. The modification order changed custody of the parties’ minor child from the appellant mother to the appellee father. Custody matters are initially entrusted to the sound discretion of the trial judge, which matters, on appeal, will be reviewed de novo on the record and affirmed in the absence of an abuse of the trial judge’s discretion. In our de novo review, where the evidence is in conflict, we will give weight to the fact that the trial judge observed and heard the witnesses and accepted one version of the facts rather than another. Chalupa v. Chalupa, 220 Neb. 704, 371 N.W.2d 706 (1985); Parsons v. Parsons, 219 Neb. 736, 365 N.W.2d 841 (1985). After reviewing the matter de novo on the record, we find no abuse of the discretion of the trial court, and we find that custody of the minor child should be changed as ordered by the trial court.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

This is an appeal from an order modifying the custody provisions of a decree of dissolution of the parties’ marriage. The modification order changed custody of the parties’ minor child from the appellant mother to the appellee father. Custody matters are initially entrusted to the sound discretion of the trial judge, which matters, on appeal, will be reviewed de novo on the record and affirmed in the absence of an abuse of the trial judge’s discretion. In our de novo review, where the evidence is in conflict, we will give weight to the fact that the trial judge observed and heard the witnesses and accepted one version of the facts rather than another. Chalupa v. Chalupa, 220 Neb. 704, 371 N.W.2d 706 (1985); Parsons v. Parsons, 219 Neb. 736, 365 N.W.2d 841 (1985). After reviewing the matter de novo on the record, we find no abuse of the discretion of the trial court, and we find that custody of the minor child should be changed as ordered by the trial court.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

395 N.W.2d 494, 223 Neb. 906, 1986 Neb. LEXIS 1117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cole-v-cole-neb-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack