This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
The case involves a dispute over child custody between the parents. The district court granted sole custody of the child to the mother and visitation rights to the father. The father, representing himself, appealed the decision, arguing against the custody arrangement.
Procedural History
- District Court, August 26, 2009: Granted sole custody of the child to the mother and visitation rights to the father.
Parties' Submissions
- Appellant (Father): Argued against the district court's custody decision, repeating claims made in his docketing statement and opposing the proposed affirmance in the calendar notice.
- Appellee (Mother): [Not applicable or not found]
Legal Issues
- Whether the district court erred in granting sole custody of the child to the mother.
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision to grant sole custody to the mother and visitation rights to the father.
Reasons
Per Bustamante J. (Fry and Vanzi JJ. concurring): The court found that the father, as the appellant, failed to meet his burden of demonstrating errors in fact or law in the district court's decision. The father merely repeated arguments already addressed in the court's calendar notice, which proposed affirmance. The court concluded that the district court's decision was correct and affirmed it for the reasons outlined in the calendar notice.