STRONG v WEAVER
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
No. 83-424 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF T S STATE OF MONTANA IE 1984 MOLLY STRONG, Petitioner and Appellant, -vsBILLY RAY WEAVER, Respondent and Respondent. APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Eleventh Judicial District, In and for the County of Flathead, The Honorable Flichael Keedy, Judge presiding. COUNSEL OF RECORD: For Appellant: Richard DeJana, Kalispell, Montana For Respondent: George B. Best, Kalispell, Montana - . - Submitted on Briefs: Decided: Filed: ' April 18, 1984 July 23, 1984 Mr. Justice Daniel J. Shea delivered the Opinion of the Court. Petitioner wife, Molly Strong, appeals an order of the Flathead County District Court modifying a previous order that had defined the "reasonable visitation" rights of the respondent husband, Billy Ray Weaver. appealed the previous order. The wife had not The trial court modified the previous visitation schedule after it held a contempt hearing to determine whether the wife had been denying the husband his rights under subsequently that previous order. found the wife separate visitation The trial court in contempt. hearing, nor was the There was no appealed order supported by findings of fact and ~onclusions of law. vacate the appealed order and remand the cause to We the District Court for a visitation hearing. The wife presents only one issue. trial court had jurisdiction to That is whether the modify the previous visitation order without holding a visitation hearing and without entering findings and conclusions that the modification was in the "best interest" of the child under section 40-4-217 (3) , MCA. Custody awarded to of the parties' child, Anneve, was the wife under the decree of dissolution of marriage entered June 21, 1979. was awarded infant "reasonable At that time, the husband (child) visitation" rights. The husband was compelled three times to petition the court to order visitation because the wife was not providing him with "reasonable visitation." petitioned the court On the third time, the husband to clarify the terms "reasonable visitation" by setting out a specific visitation schedule, and the court did so. That visitation schedule was later modified by the court after the contempt hearing, granting increased visitation rights to the husband, and the wife appeals that modification order. Section 40-4-217(3), MCA, controls the modification of a visitation order. be modified " That section provides that the order may . . . whenever interest of the child;. . ." (it) would serve the best That section contemplates a visitation hearing and a finding that any modification would be in the child's "best interest." Further, this ultimate finding must be supported by findings and conclusions so that the parties are informed the of basis of the court's decision, and so that this Court may effective1.y review the Jones v. Jones (Mont. 1980) , trial court's determination. 620 P.2d 850, 37 St.Rep. 1973. Here there was no visitation hearing, no finding in the order that the modification was in the "best interest" of the child, and no findings and conclusions to support the order. We vacate the June 13, 1983 visitation order and remand this cause for a visitation hearing. regarding visitation conclusions. We Concur: Chief Justice must be Any modification order supported by findings and
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
