## Facts

- Former spouses Justin William Cerwick (father) and Machelle Lynn Cerwick, now Machelle Lynn Peterson (mother), are the parents of three minor children.
- Following dissolution proceedings and later disputes, the parties litigated modification of the physical-care provisions governing the children.
- In the modification proceedings, the district court determined circumstances affecting the children and parents had materially changed and ordered that the children’s physical care be placed with the mother.
- The district court also set a visitation schedule and child support; after the father filed a motion under Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.904(2), the court modified visitation and adjusted the father’s child support obligation.
- The father appealed, challenging the transfer of physical care and related orders.

## Issues

1. Whether the moving party proved a material and substantial change in circumstances since the prior decree or order, affecting the children’s welfare and warranting modification of physical care.
2. Whether placing the children in the mother’s physical care better served the children’s long-range best interests, including stability and parental support for the other parent’s relationship.
3. Whether the district court erred in its visitation and child-support determinations and whether appellate attorney fees should be awarded.

## Decision

- The court reviewed the modification de novo, giving weight to the district court’s fact findings and credibility assessments.
- The court affirmed the modification transferring physical care to the mother, finding she proved a substantial change in circumstances and showed she could minister more effectively to the children’s best interests.
- The court affirmed the related visitation and child-support rulings as modified by the district court following the rule 1.904(2) motion.
- The court ordered the father to pay $5,000 toward the mother’s appellate attorney fees.

## Legal Principles

- In physical-care modification cases, the controlling consideration is the best interests of the children, assessed with a long-range focus.
- The party seeking modification bears a heavy burden to prove a material and substantial change in circumstances that was not within the parties’ contemplation at the time of the prior decree or order, is relatively permanent rather than temporary, and affects the children’s welfare.
- Beyond showing changed circumstances, the movant must prove superior ability to minister more effectively to the children’s well-being under the proposed arrangement.
- Appellate courts review custody and physical-care modification matters de novo but give weight to the district court’s credibility findings.
- Appellate attorney-fee awards in domestic cases are discretionary and may consider relative ability to pay, the merits of the appeal, and the necessity and reasonableness of the fees.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed the district court’s order transferring physical care of the parties’ three children to the mother because she proved a substantial, relatively permanent change affecting the children’s welfare and demonstrated greater ability to meet the children’s long-range best interests; the court also affirmed the related visitation and child-support orders and awarded the mother $5,000 in appellate attorney fees.


In re Marriage of Cerwick, 957 N.W.2d 29 (Iowa Ct. App. 2021)