## Facts

- Karen Fischer filed for dissolution of her marriage to Bruce Fischer in 2006 after approximately 14 years of marriage.
- Karen and Bruce had two children.
- Around the time she filed for dissolution, Karen obtained a restraining order that prohibited Bruce from contacting her or the children.
- The trial court held a hearing in the dissolution action at which custody and visitation were disputed.
- Karen testified that Bruce verbally abused her during the marriage, kept her isolated from friends and family, and frequently shoved her.
- Karen also testified that Bruce grabbed her during one incident and threatened to kill her.
- Bruce denied that the threatening incident occurred and testified that Karen had committed violent acts against him.
- After hearing the testimony, the trial court found that Bruce had committed acts of domestic violence against Karen.
- The trial court entered a parenting plan that required Bruce’s visitation to be supervised, granted Karen sole decision-making authority regarding the children, and required Bruce to participate in a domestic-violence treatment program.
- Bruce appealed, challenging both the domestic-violence finding and the restrictions imposed in the parenting plan.

## Issues

1. Whether substantial evidence supported the trial court’s finding that Bruce committed acts of domestic violence against Karen for purposes of parenting-plan restrictions.
2. Whether the trial court improperly imposed parenting-plan restrictions (supervised visitation, sole decision-making, and treatment) without addressing an identified harm as required by Washington’s parenting-plan statutes, including RCW 26.09.191.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court.
- The evidence—particularly Karen’s testimony—supported the finding that Bruce committed acts of domestic violence, and the appellate court did not reweigh credibility determinations made by the trial court.
- Given the domestic-violence finding, the parenting plan’s limits (supervised visitation, sole decision-making authority for Karen, and domestic-violence treatment) were within the trial court’s authority under Washington law.

## Legal Principles

- A trial court’s factual findings in dissolution and parenting-plan proceedings are reviewed for substantial evidence; the trial court decides witness credibility and the weight of conflicting testimony.
- Parenting plans and residential-time restrictions are reviewed for abuse of discretion; an appellate court will uphold the plan if the trial court relied on tenable grounds and tenable reasons.
- Under RCW 26.09.191, a finding of domestic violence can justify, and in some circumstances require, limits on a parent’s residential time and decision-making authority, and can support conditions such as supervised contact and participation in domestic-violence treatment.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed the dissolution-related orders, holding that substantial evidence supported the trial court’s domestic-violence finding and that the resulting parenting-plan restrictions—supervised visitation, sole decision-making authority for Karen, and required domestic-violence treatment for Bruce—were properly imposed under Washington’s parenting-plan statutes.


In re Marriage of Fischer, 2009 WL 2469282 (2009)