William Taylor v. Amy Nicole Sist, 2012 ONSC 228

Case Summary

The applicant father brought a motion to change a final joint custody order, seeking shared custody of the parties' child on a week-about basis and a corresponding adjustment to child support. The court found a material change in circumstances due to the parties forming new blended families and the child's increased behavioural issues. However, the court dismissed the father's claim for shared custody, finding that the parents' high conflict, inability to communicate, and differing parenting styles made shared or joint custody unworkable and contrary to the child's best interests. The court varied the existing order to grant sole custody to the respondent mother, reduced the father's access to alternate weekends to minimize transitions, and ordered the father to pay $660.79 per month in child support.

Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: 0826/07

DATE: 2012-01-20

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN:

WILLIAM TAYLOR

Applicant

– and –

AMY NICOLE SIST

Respondent

M. Walz, Counsel for the Applicant

J.P. Paciocco, Counsel for the Respondent

HEARD: September 27, 28, 29, 30, and October 11, 12, 14 and 28, 2011

REASONS FOR DECISION

GAREAU, J.

[1] The motion to change dated March 31, 2010 brought by William Taylor proceeded to trial before me on September 27, 28, 29, 30, and October 11, 12, 14 and 28, 2011. Written submissions were then received with the reply submissions of the applicant filed with the court on November 25, 2011.

[2] In that motion to change, the applicant seeks an order for shared custody of his son Owen Sist-Taylor born June 20, 2004 whereby Owen would be in the care of each parent on a week-about schedule with the exchange to take place each Monday. At paragraph 5 of the motion to change, the applicant also seeks “an order for child support to be paid in accordance with Section 8 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines.”

[3] In her response to motion to change sworn on May 12, 2010, the respondent disagrees with the claims made by the applicant and requests no change to the existing custody and access arrangement with respect to Owen.

[4] That custody and access arrangement is set out in the court order granted on November 27, 2008 by The Honourable Mr. Justice G. Tranmer, to which further reference will be made

William Taylor v. Amy Nicole Sist, 2012 ONSC 228

Case Summary

Court File and Parties

REASONS FOR DECISION

Judge

Counsel

Parties

Areas of Law

Fact Patterns

Issues

Statutory Provisions 6

Legal Tests 2

Legislation 1