COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED March 20, 2008 David R. Schanker Clerk of Court of Appeals |
|
NOTICE |
|
|
This opinion is subject to further editing. If published, the official version will appear in the bound volume of the Official Reports. A party may file with the Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of Appeals. See Wis. Stat. § 808.10 and Rule 809.62. |
|
APPEAL
from an order of the circuit court for
Before Higginbotham, P.J., Dykman and Bridge, JJ.
¶1 PER CURIAM. Walter Schutz appeals from an
order and amended judgment increasing the amount of time the parties’ child,
Jordan, has physical placement with his mother, Michelle Schutz. Walter argues that the circuit court erred in
concluding that there had been a substantial change in circumstances since the
last order affecting placement was entered and that the circuit court
erroneously exercised its discretion in concluding that the modified placement schedule
was in
¶2 Walter first argues that Michelle has not shown a substantial
change of circumstances since the last placement order. A person seeking
modification of an order for physical placement must show that there has been a
substantial change of circumstances since the entry of the last order affecting
physical placement. See Wis. Stat. § 767.451(1)(b)1.b.
(2005-06);[1]
Landwehr
v. Landwehr, 2006 WI 64, ¶12, 291
¶3 We conclude that there has been a substantial change in circumstances since the last placement order was entered. Michelle has been successfully treated for bi-polar disorder, which was previously misdiagnosed. Michelle has been stable on her medications for the last two years. With her medical stabilization, Michelle has been able to maintain a residence and has completed school. The positive change in Michelle’s health is a substantial change of circumstances because it has profoundly affected her functioning in many areas of her life.
¶4 Walter next argues that the circuit court erroneously
exercised its discretion in modifying the placement order and granting the
parties nearly equal placement time. “A
trial court’s consideration and weighing of factors to determine what course of
action is in a child’s best interests is an exercise of discretion, and we may
not substitute our own judgment for the trial court’s properly exercised
discretion.” Greene, 277
By the Court.—Order affirmed.
This opinion will not be published. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.23(1)(b)5.