## Facts

- Marissa Renee Blank and Caleb Robert Blank married in 2011 and had two minor children (born 2011 and 2014).
- Marissa filed for dissolution in 2017 and requested joint legal custody in her complaint; she submitted a parenting plan contemplating substantial time for both parents.
- The parties later signed a proposed parenting plan stating they would share joint legal and physical custody; the district court did not adopt either proposed plan before trial.
- Caleb sought temporary joint legal and physical custody; the court instead issued temporary orders granting Marissa temporary legal and physical custody with broad parenting time for Caleb.
- At trial, unresolved matters included custody, parenting time, and child-related financial issues; both parties presented evidence relevant to custody and co-parenting.
- The district court dissolved the marriage and awarded joint legal and physical custody.
- Marissa appealed, asserting lack of notice that joint physical custody would be imposed, error in rejecting a domestic-abuse characterization, and error in finding joint custody served the children’s best interests.

## Issues

1. Whether awarding joint physical custody violated procedural due process because neither party requested it immediately before trial and the court did not expressly notify the parties it was considering joint custody.
2. Whether the district court erred by finding the case did not involve domestic intimate partner abuse, thereby avoiding additional statutory findings.
3. Whether awarding joint legal and physical custody was an abuse of discretion under the children’s best interests standard.

## Decision

- The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the dissolution decree.
- The court held Marissa had reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard on joint custody; due process was not violated.
- The court held the district court did not err in finding no domestic intimate partner abuse requiring additional statutory findings.
- The court held the joint legal and physical custody award was within the district court’s discretion and supported by the record as serving the children’s best interests.

## Legal Principles

- Custody determinations are reviewed de novo on the record, but are affirmed absent an abuse of discretion; an abuse occurs when a ruling is clearly untenable and unfairly deprives a litigant of a substantial right.
- Procedural due process requires reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard appropriate to the proceeding and the rights at stake; it does not require a particular procedure.
- A court may award joint legal or physical custody without parental consent if it is in the child’s best interests, but the parties must have an opportunity to present evidence on joint custody when it is to be imposed.
- When evidence is conflicting on alleged abuse, appellate courts may give weight to the trial court’s credibility findings and acceptance of one version of events over another.
- Joint physical custody is appropriate only when the parents can cooperate sufficiently to provide stability for the children and not perpetuate ongoing conflict.

## Conclusion

The Nebraska Supreme Court upheld joint legal and physical custody because the record showed the parents had notice that joint custody was at issue and were heard on it, the evidence did not compel a statutory domestic-abuse finding, and the best-interests determination fell within the district court’s discretionary authority.


Blank v. Blank, 930 N.W.2d 523 (Neb. 2019)