Augustine Kunle Adedeji v. Taiye Adetoun Adedeji

Upper Marlboro, Maryland family law lawyers represent the parties in a divorce (dissolution of Marriage) case.



MoreLaw was created to help people find experienced lawyers to represent them in the more than 3,144 counties across the United States. Click the link above to see a list of lawyers ready and willing to represent you if you have a legal problem and need help.





Mother and Father married on October 24, 2015. Their son, O.A., was born in 2016, and their daughter, I.A., was born in 2018. In June 2023, Father filed for divorce in the Circuit Court for Prince George's County, claiming irreconcilable differences. Mother filed an answer and a counter-complaint for absolute divorce. On March 19, April 16, August 22, and September 19, 2024, the circuit court held a multi-day merits hearing. Father testified and called witnesses, including his father, Augustine Adedeji, Sr., his mother, Tiaa Adedeji, and his sister, Monica Adedeji. Mother also testified and called witnesses, including the children's nanny, Joyce Inji, and her mother, Adeola Ayoola.



Father first called his father, Augustine Adedeji Sr., to testify, and he stated that the minor children visit his home "maybe twice a month" and Mother has not accompanied the children on visits to his home since 2022. He stated that, when the children visit his home, he has observed that Father primarily cares for the children by "changing diapers" and "taking the children to the bathroom." He testified that Mother would not assist during visits and that she would participate in Zoom calls with her family. He testified that Mother informed him that she and Father "had an issue in the marriage" prior to his son informing him of the marital issue. He listened to the concerns of both Mother and Father. When asked if he believes his son to be "a fit and proper person to have shared custody of his kids[,]" he responded that he has observed "that most times he's the one that goes to the -to the bathroom to change their diapers" and that Father will "take out their plates, give them food.... He's the one to carry them each to the car - back to the car." He described Mother as "hyper" and lacking consistency.



* * *



On September 19, 2024, the court issued an oral ruling granting an absolute divorce. As for custody, the court ruled:



We're here for the Plaintiff's complaint of absolute divorce, and the Defendant's complaint - counter-complaint for absolute divorce. Having heard the testimony of all the parties, their witnesses, and being able to witness their demeanor and judge their credibility, the Court makes the following determination.



Having reviewed factors in Montgomery County v. Sanders and Taylor v. Taylor, the Court believes that the parties are fit and proper parent (sic) for joint legal and shared physical custody of their two minor children with primary residential custody awarded to the Defendant during the school year, and reasonable rights of access to the Plaintiff as follows.



Commencing September 26th and every other week thereafter, the gentleman will have access from Thursday after school until Monday morning before school and/or daycare for the minor children.



Commencing with the Summer of 2025 and every summer thereafter, the parties will have access with the minor children on a week-on/week-off basis, with the Plaintiff having the first full week that school is out. Parties will alternate holidays on an even/odd year basis, with the Defendant having odd years, and the Plaintiff having even years. And it'll - the years will always commence with the Martin Luther King holiday each year. So you go from Martin Luther King Day and alternate.



Thanksgiving and school vacation: The Defendant shall have the minor children for the Thanksgiving holiday and school vacation commencing in 2024, and even numbered years thereafter. The Plaintiff shall have the minor children for this time period in 2025 and in odd years thereafter.



For the Christmas holiday and school vacation commencing in 2024 and even numbered years thereafter, the Plaintiff shall have the minor children from the day the school Christmas vacation commences until 2 p.m. on Christmas Day. The Defendant shall have the children from 2 p.m. on Christmas Day through Sunday that classes resume. The schedule shall be reversed in odd years.



Easter holiday and school vacation: The Defendant shall have the minor children for the Easter holiday and school vacation commencing in 2025, and in odd numbered years thereafter. The Plaintiff shall have the minor children for this time period in 2026 and even numbered years thereafter.



* * *



Legal issue Did the trial court abuse its discretion in awarding primary physical custody to one parent without adequately articulating the analysis and application of the Sanders-Taylor factors?

Headnote



FAMILY LAW. CUSTODY DETERMINATION. The case addresses whether the trial court erred and abused its discretion by awarding primary physical custody to one parent during the school year without thoroughly analyzing or applying the legal standards from Montgomery County v. Sanders and Taylor v. Taylor, and whether the custody decision was in the children's best interests.



FAMILY LAW. BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD. The appellate court remanded the case for further proceedings as the trial court failed to specifically reference record facts, analyze relevant custody factors, or clearly explain why the custody arrangement ordered was in the best interest of the children.

Key Phrases Primary residential custody. Irreconcilable differences. Montgomery County v. Sanders. Physical custody determination. Trial court discretion.

Reversed