Luisa Tula

The parties resolved all issues arising from their separation except the allocation of parenting time for their four-year-old child.

The respondent mother sought to maintain the status quo, where the child was returned to her at 8:15 p.m. during the applicant father's parenting time.

The applicant proposed that the child remain overnight, resulting in an equal shared parenting schedule.

The court accepted the applicant's proposal, supported by the Office of the Children's Lawyer, finding that the late-evening transitions unnecessarily disrupted the child's bedtime routine and that equal time with both capable parents was in the child's best interests.

The Respondent brought a motion seeking an order to compel an Office of the Children's Lawyer (OCL) clinician to attend for questioning and produce records related to an OCL report.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that the Respondent failed to satisfy the three-part test under Family Law Rule 20(5) for compelling a non-party's attendance.

Additionally, the Respondent had not filed a statement disputing the OCL report within the timelines required by Family Law Rule 21(e), rendering the report uncontested evidence.