In re the Parenting of CMR, 2016 MT 120 (May 24, 2016) (McGrath, C.J.) (5-0, aff’d)
Issue: (1) Whether the district court erred in denying father’s motion to change venue; (2) whether the district court erred in granting mother’s motion to dismiss the modification of the parenting plan; and (3) whether the district court violated father’s due process rights.
Short Answer: (1) No; (2) no; and (3) no.
Facts: CMR was born in November 2009 to Ray and Amber. They lived together until May 2010, and have been litigating the terms of their parenting plan as CMR has gotten older. Amber is CMR’s primary care provider. The parents signed a mediation parenting plan in February 2015, which is the basis of this appeal.…