A focused Family Law Rule 1 trial concerning custody and access of a child born February 5, 2012.
The parties settled custody (sole to mother), child support, and mobility restrictions during trial.
The remaining issue was access.
The applicant sought equal time sharing on a 2-2-3 schedule; the respondent sought continuation of the existing temporary order.
The court found the respondent to be the more credible witness and determined that the current access schedule (Wednesday overnight and alternate weekends) was in the child's best interests.
The court rejected the applicant's proposal for equal shared parenting, finding that the child has significant anxiety and difficulty with transitions, and that the respondent is better positioned to meet the child's emotional and developmental needs.
The court also found the applicant lacked insight into the child's needs and had engaged in aggressive litigation tactics.
