Snyder v. Snyder: Too Cute by Half

Sometimes, even the courts, which are all about technicality, can be too technical.

That’s one major takeaway from Snyder v. Snyder, a recent Utah Court of Appeals case. Here are the facts, briefly:

Facts

  1. Parties divorced in 2008, reaching an agreement in mediation.
  2. In 2012, mother filed for a modification of child support.
  3. Mediation on this issue was unsuccessful, so parties went to a pretrial conference with the judge to get ready for trial.
  4. At the pretrial conference, the judge certified for trial the issue of child support. The father wanted the judge to certify parent-time and custody issues, but the judge declined, telling the father he would have to file a new petition to modify custody and parent-time, and that those issues would not be addressed at the upcoming trial.
  5. Court ordered parties to try mediation again regarding the child support issue.
  6. Parties reached an agreement in mediation addressing only child support. The stipulation contained the following language: “[this stipulation] resolve[s] all matters between the parties that are currently before the Court.”
  7. Two months after child support was modified, father filed a petition to modify custody and parent-time. Mother objected because there was no substantial change in circumstances because the previous stipulation, signed two months earlier, said all matters between parties had been resolved.
  8. The trial court accepted mother’s reasoning and dismissed father’s petition to modify, saying the stipulation took care of everything, and only two months had passed, so there couldn’t have been a substantial change in circumstance in that small a period of time.

Court of Appeal’s Decision

The Court of Appeals looked at this case and disagreed with the trial court.

Essentially, the Court of Appeals said the father’s request to modify custody and parent-time was not actually an issue before the trial court when the parties signed the stipulation. While the stipulation said everything was taken care of, it was only referring to the things then before the court (i.e., child support). So, the trial court’s denial of the father’s petition to modify was poorly reasoned and was overturned.

Here’s my realistic (i.e., less legalistic) take on what happened here.

The trial court specifically told the father to go back and ask for a modification of custody and parent-time. Then when he did this, the same court precluded him from doing so. While the Court of Appeals didn’t say it this way, it told the trial court it was being too cute by half. If you tell someone what to do, then tell him, “Well, no, you can’t do exactly what I told you to do,” that’s simply not fair.

Good for the Court of Appeals.

Protect Your Money And Your Family

We remove fear associated with divorce, protect your money & maximize time with your kids!

We're here to help. Let's determine your best options.

Call Us 24//7 at 801-685-9999 to Speak with a Live Representative

Utah Divorce FAQs
Top 100 Divorce Blog
What Clients Are Saying…
BrownLaw icon
Excellent
Brown Family Law
Based on 949 reviews
Russell Yauney was my attorney at Brown Family Law. Throughout the process, Russell and his paralegal Conor, were extremely helpful and patient. They were highly responsive, thorough, and most importantly: did not make me feel insignificant or embarrassed for asking clarifying questions. Russell made himself available and whenever he wasn't, Conor was. The Friday Phone Calls were reliable and I knew I could expect an update each week. The firm's texting abilities also made it easy to send a quick question/concern if I ever needed it. Russell was a fantastic attorney and guide to have throughout my situation. I highly recommend this firm.
This law firm went above and beyond for me and my case. I would highly recommend them to anyone needing a good lawyer for custody issues.
Response from the owner:Thank you, Denney. So glad we could help.
Carren is absolutely amazing! Made things easy and always was helpful explaining.
Shout out to Carlos! Very nice, and knows the value of good legal representation.
Jennifer and Dani did a wonderful job handling my case. The communication and accessibility were top notch.
Brown Family Law is very professional. They use their phenomenal expertise to manage every case with care. I would highly recommend them.
Response from the owner:Thank you, Kim. Glad we could help.
Very thorough and on top of dates and timing for various documents.
My attorney Andrew Christensen was great! He was very helpful while being realistic and upfront with me at the initial consultation. He did a great job of guiding me and answering any questions I had throughout the whole process. My paralegal Carren Leavitt was also very helpful. I appreciated her weekly check-ins, for the aid she provided, and the questions answered.
Clay Randle provided exceptional support and counsel. He was patient, knowledgeable, and thoughtfully addressed my many questions and concerns. Thank you very much!
Paul and Dani were incredibly communicative, educational, willing to work with our unique circumstances, and took the whole process from complicated and overwhelming to simple. Highly recommend!!
yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7

Categories