On a motion concerning interim custody, access, and child support, the father sought a temporary order reflecting recommendations made in an Office of the Children’s Lawyer investigation report and a reduction of ongoing child support.
The court held that while the factual evidence contained in an assessment report may be considered on an interim motion, the assessor’s recommendations should generally not be relied upon absent exceptional circumstances.
Applying that approach, the court declined to adopt the recommendations wholesale and instead fashioned an interim parenting arrangement maintaining the child’s primary residence with the mother while granting the father defined access, including summer and monthly school‑year parenting time.
The court also declined to reduce child support, imputing income to the father on the basis that he was not earning to his full potential.
The result was a temporary parenting and access regime with child support remaining unchanged.
