Debbie Denise v. Joseph Zachary Zoellner

Windom, Minnesota family law lawyers represented the parties a custody dispute.

Debbie Denise Koch and Joseph Zachary Zoellner have two joint children. Prior to 2019, the parties shared joint legal and joint physical custody of the children, and father had 43% of parenting time and mother had 57% of parenting time.



On January 8, 2019, child-protection services removed the children from mother's care and placed them in father's care because mother failed a drug test. Father subsequently requested that the district court modify physical custody and the parenting-time schedule. He sought temporary sole physical custody of the children and requested that mother receive supervised parenting time subject to certain conditions, including maintaining her sobriety. Mother opposed the motion. In December 2019, pursuant to the parties' stipulation, the district court modified custody and parenting time by awarding father sole physical custody of the children and reducing mother's parenting time to 31%. The district court granted mother unsupervised parenting time conditioned on her continued sobriety.



The district court did not alter the parties' joint legal custody of the children. Shortly thereafter, mother achieved, and has since maintained, her sobriety.



Since the 2019 custody and parenting-time modification, both parties have re-married. In 2021, father married T.Z., who regularly assists with parenting time and supervision of the children. And in August 2023, mother married K.L., who also regularly assists with parenting time and supervision. K.L. had multiple domestic-assault-related convictions between 2011 and 2019.



In October 2023, mother moved the district court to modify the parenting-time schedule to allow for equal parenting time between the parties. Mother argued that modification was in the children's best interests because, among other reasons, she has achieved and maintained sobriety, she has successfully completed treatment for alcohol and controlled-substance abuse, she has been consistent with her existing parenting-time obligations, she has an "excellent" relationship with the children, modification would benefit her relationship with the children, she had been the primary caregiver for most of the children's lives, and she has cooperated with father in co-parenting the children.



Following a hearing, the district court denied mother's motion, concluding in pertinent part that modification of the schedule was not in the best interests of the children; the children are "thriving under the current schedule"; the children are "happy, healthy, and feel safe"; the parties have been effectively co-parenting under the existing schedule; and the current schedule provides consistency and "generous parenting time to both parents."



* * *



FAMILY LAW. PARENTING TIME MODIFICATION. The case examines an appeal by a mother against a district court order that denied her motion to modify a court-ordered parenting-time schedule. The court evaluated whether the modification was in the children's best interests and found no abuse of discretion in maintaining the existing schedule.



FAMILY LAW. BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD. The court considered various statutory factors to assess the children's best interests in maintaining consistency and a positive environment in their primary caregiving home, ultimately deciding against modifying the parenting time that was already deemed beneficial for the children's well-being.



FAMILY LAW. CONSIDERATION OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE HISTORY. The court properly considered potential risks to the children arising from domestic assault-related convictions of the mother's new husband when assessing the potential modification of the parenting-time order.



Key Phrases Court-ordered parenting time. District court's decision. Parenting-time schedule. Best interests of the children. Mother's husband's history of domestic abuse.

Affirmed