Mom Gets Destroyed After Years Of Dictating Visitation Rules To Dad...

All right. Any opening statement, Miss Lumpt? No, your honor. Sorry. One more matter of housekeeping. I believe in Miss Heather Villigan's declaration, she has a minor child's full name. I was wondering if that document should be marked uh confidential. Miss Wisher, um let me just review that quick. If there is a minor child's name in there, I have no objection to that document being marked as confidential. That's fine. That document will be marked as confidential. That's record index 70. Have no further housekeeping. I have no opening statement, your honor. Miss Wisher any opening statement? No,

your honor. We would wave opening statement in the interest of time and getting this matter completed for these parties. All right. And just so the parties are aware, I have another hearing immediately following this one. I am likely to take the matter under advisement and issue a written opinion, although I expect to have it out within a week. So that's my plan today in light of the volume of the exhibits and in the interest of time. So I I'm not going to be ruling from the bench Today. Miss Lount, go ahead and call your first

witness. Thank you, your honor. I call uh Britney Jord. Miss Jordan, I'll need you to unmute your microphone and raise your right hand so I can see it. Ma'am, for the testimony you're about to give, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So, help me, Pat. I do. You can lower your hand. I'll need you to state and spell your full name for the record for me. Uh, Britney Lee Jordan. B R I T T N I L E E J O R D A HL. All right.

Go ahead, M. Thank you, your honor. Good morning, Miss Jordan. In paragraph nine of your declaration, you state when discussing the visits between Trevor and um [clears throat] BSJ, Trevor often chooses or chose shorter visits. Correct. Yes, Mr. You control Trevor's parenting time schedule. Correct. Um after February, he chose from December all the way until February. No. Uh so from February 226 of this year, you state the dates and times that um BSJ is available for Trevor to have parenting time. Correct? Yes. In his best interest. I am asking yes or no questions. Please stick

to yes or no in your responses under exhibit three. And your honor, if I may share my screen. I don't know if that's an option. Yes. Okay. Okay, I'm [clears throat] sharing exhibit 3. Miss, do you see exhibit 3 in front of you? Can you make it a little bit bigger? Yeah, I can make it bigger. Okay, I just zoomed in because of text messages. Oh, sorry. I meant bigger. So, Oh, zoom in. Sorry. Um, do you see exhibit three in front of you? Yes. Okay. Um, and these are text messages between you and Trevor,

correct? Yes. And if we look at various text messages, we can see when you offered certain dates and times, correct? Yes. So, specifically in March here, we can see that you offered various dates from 5 to 7:00 p.m. Correct. I can't read, but it looks like dates consecutive. Looks like March 2nd, March 9th, March 10th, and March 30th approximately. Correct? Yes. Okay. Um, [clears throat] and then if we go to page three of exhibit three, we see again there's more dates here in April. Um, and [clears throat] there's various dates and times that you offer

to visit from 4:00 to 7:00 p.m. Correct. Yes. Now, Miss J, you'd agree with me that Trevor didn't choose shorter visits. You offered him shorter visits. Correct? Those are longer visits from his December to February. That's not my question, Miss Jordan. I asked you offer Trevor shorter visits from 4 to 7:00 p.m. Correct. Yes. In paragraph 16 of your declaration, you claim that BSJ, you kept BSJ home on April 4th until the conditions improved. Um, [clears throat] correct. Correct. M. The first message you sent Trevor on April 4th, 2026 was notifying him that you were

cancelling his visit with BSJ. Correct. Yes. Dependent on the weather and it cleared up. No, Miss Jordan. Again, I am asking you yes or no questions. Please stick to yes or no. Um, your honor, if I may share exhibit F. Go ahead. And just for future reference, I need you to make sure you're also referring to the record index number. Okay. In Odyssey. Yes. Not just the exhibit label because there are some crossover exhibits. Yes. Um so with exhibit F your honor I am referring to um court exhibit 40 index 40. Thank you. [clears throat]

Okay, let's miss journal. Do you see Oops. page 19. Oh gosh, there's a delay. Here you go. Um, of your text of exhibit F chord index 40 in front of you. Can you make it? Sorry, I'm on a I'm on a iPad. Can you make it? There you go. Yes. Perfect. Um, so in your first message here, um, you're saying but for um, BSJ safety, he'll be staying home. Um, and then the last sentence you say there will be no exchange today. Correct. Correct. Trevor asked later on if he could pick uh, BSJ up later

once the roads were clear. Correct. Can you highlight it? Yes. Sorry, my computer just froze on me. Um Um We'll move on. Mr. D, can you still see the April 4th, 2026 exchange from 10:3903 in front of you? Yes. Okay. Um [clears throat] again you said I am not agreeing to any exchange today due to unsafe travel conditions. Correct. Correct. Now once the road clear you offered to let Trevor have BSJ later in the day. Correct. Yes. Um you offered him an extra hour of parenting time after you had canled the first approximately 4 hours

of his visit. Correct. Correct. Um, I'm going to stop sharing my screen. Miss J, in paragraph 22, you claimed Trevor chose not to utilize more time with BSJ on four specific days. Um, those were April 27th, April 29th, May 4th, and May 13th. Correct. If it's in there, then I would say correct. Okay. Um, April 27th, April 29th, May 4th, and May 13th were all weekdays. Correct. I'm sorry I don't have a calendar in front of me, but I'm going to go off what you say. Okay. Assuming those were work days, um [clears throat] you're

aware that Trevor is supposed to work until 5:00 p.m. Correct. Not always. Um are you aware, Miss Stole, that Trevor routinely had to leave work early to meet you at the 3:30 or 4 p.m. exchange time? At the time I did not know and he had texted me later to inform me. Okay. So you are aware that his workday goes until 5:00 PM. Now I am. Moro, you'd agree with me that Trevor isn't intentionally choosing shorter visits when your proposed pairing time requires him to leave work early for visits. Correct. Can you repeat that? You'd

agree with me that Trevor isn't intentionally choosing shorter visits with BSJ when your proposed parenting time requires him to leave work early. Correct. Um, I leave work early. Do you have universal control and availability to leave work early whenever you'd like? Not whenever. We have to make sure we're staffed. Yet, you are requiring Trevor to have universal control and availability in his schedule to leave work early, right? Sure. Miss J Trevor never agreed to Oaks being the exclusive exchange location for parenting time. Correct. It's where he has always come he to come to my house.

Mr. Gad, it's a yes or no question. You told Trevor exchanges would occur in Oaks, correct? If it says it in the text. Trevor asked to exchange BSJ and North Dakota. Correct. Yes. Um except for one occasion you would refuse to exchange BSJ and Glenn, right? Except for what? One occasion. One occasion. Yes. You'd agree with me. Over the last few months, Trevor has repeatedly asked um for more time with Breen. Correct. Yes. And you've denied his request for additional parenting time. No, he's gotten time. You granted him every single request of parenting time he's

asked for. Not every single parenting time because we go off of what's in Breen's best interest and his schedule. And that is the schedule that you created. Correct. It's what his schedule is. But you've you've set the dates and times for that schedule, right? I've also offered for him the yes or no question. So, all right. Stop. Miss Jordan, I need you to listen to the question. I need you to answer the question and only the question, not what you want it to be. Your attorney is going to have an opportunity to ask you questions,

too, to clarify points. Okay. Answer only the question. Okay. Okay. All right. Go ahead, Miss Lant. Thank you, your honor. Miss Journal, you're requesting that Trevor's parenting time be restricted to every other weekend from Friday at 4:00 to Sunday at 4. Correct. Correct. Uh throughout [clears throat] your allegations, you've made no allegations that Trevor is incapable of providing BSJ with nurture, love, affection, and guidance. Correct. Correct. You've made no allegation that Trevor has not provided BSJ with adequate food. Correct. Correct. You've made no allegations that Trevor has not provided BSJ with adequate clothing. Correct. Correct.

Um you've [clears throat] made no allegations that Trevor does not have um substantial or adequate housing for BSJ. True. True. In fact, in paragraph 72 of your declaration, you stated Trevor is capable of providing for BSJ during his parenting time. Right. Right. You'd agree with me that Trevor is pro is able to provide BSJ with adequate food, clothing, and shelter. Right. Yep. To date, Miss Jordan, you have made no allegations about BSJ safety or security with Trevor. Right. Right. Uh Miss Jordan, you claim factor J, which deals with domestic violence, favors you in your declaration.

Correct. Yes. Okay. Trevor has never physically harmed you, right? No. Trevor has never caused you bodily injury, right? Correct. Trevor has never compelled sexual activity by force. True. True. Trevor has never assaulted you. Right. Never. Trevor has never caused you fear of imminent physical harm. Right. Right. And Trevor has never physically harmed BSJ. Correct. I can't answer that. Have you ever accused Trevor of harming BSJ? Um, no. Have you ever [clears throat] noticed any bruises or markings on BSJ when he's returned from his parenting time with Trevor? He's a toddler. No. Well, bruises, yes, but

no. Not beyond what you would expect with a toddler. Mr. When BSJ was born, you were in a relationship with Jeremy Skogland, correct? Yes. Did your relationship with Jeremy affect your ability to develop a secure bond with BSJ? No. Okay. If your relationship didn't affect your ability to bond with BSJ, isn't it fair to say that Trevor's marriage wouldn't affect his relationship with BSJ? True. Despite what you wrote in your declaration, what did they say? In your declaration, you stated that you were concerned that Trevor's marriage to Logan would affect his ability to bond with

BSJ. Right. Sure. Now, within your declaration, you've made no allegations that BSJ has been harmed during his parenting time with Trevor, right? Can you repeat that? Um, I will actually move on cuz it's a duplicate question. Within your declaration, Miss Shortle, there is no allegation that BSJ has ever been returned hungry. Right. Did you say in my declaration or what? I'm sorry. Yeah. In your within your declaration, you've made no allegations that BSJ has been returned hungry or anything. I don't know if I did. Okay. Um, at every exchange, BSJ is wearing appropriate appropriate clothing.

Correct. He's wearing clothing. Okay. Um, when BSJ was born, Trevor requested a paternity test. Correct. Not to me. Okay. Since BSJ's birth, Trevor has asked for a paternity test for BSJ. Correct. Uh, to the best of my knowledge, he's never asked me. He's never asked you in text message for a paternity test. I think I've stated to him to get his paternity test. Am I allowed to answer this or no? Yes. Okay. Um, just one moment. Mr. Turtle, on July 16, 2024, Trevor texted you, "The only way I can establish paternity is if a paternity

test is done." Correct. Correct. Okay. So that would be him asking for a paternity test. Correct. Sure. Okay. And then on October 18th, 2024, Trevor texted you, "So I want a visitation schedule set by mediator and a paternity test done before that." Correct. Correct. And that is him asking for test. Correct. Sure. And that's a yes. Mhm. I need the words, not mhm and ahas. Okay. Sorry. And it's just because if there's a transcript prepared, it won't be clear whether that's a yes or no. So just to make sure I understand. Okay. Perfect. Can you

ask the question again, Miss Lump? That was Trevor asking for a paternity test. Correct. Correct. In paragraph 96 of your declaration, Miss Shle, you stated, "Once paternity was legally established, I immediately began facilitating parenting time and have continued to offer parenting opportunities beyond what Trevor consistently exercised during the first 18 months of BSJ's life. Correct. Yes. You offered more parenting time opportunities to Trevor once his paternity was established, right? offered when we talked about it. Yes. Again, it's a yes or no question. Yes. Mr. Rod, you're waiting for Trevor's paternity to be established before you

allow Trevor reasonable and consistent parenting time. Correct. Correct. Mle, you claim that a gradual and consistent increase in parenting time best supports BSJ's development. True. I do believe that. Since earlier this year, you have gradually increased [laughter] Trevor's parenting time with BSJ. Correct. Can you repeat that? Yes. Since earlier of this year, 2026, you have gradually increased Trevor's parenting time with BSJ. Correct. Yes. Over the last few months, you have changed and modified his schedule to increase Trevor's parenting time, right? Yes. BSJ's schedule and routine is different from January 2026 than it is today. Correct.

Correct. You'd agree with me that BSJ has adapted to his new schedule and routine with Trevor, right? Yes. Since BSJ has adapted to his new schedule with Trevor over the last few months, isn't it fair to say that BSJ would adapt to a gradual and consistent increase in Trevor's parenting time? Um, should [clears throat] he be awarded equal parenting time? Sure. I have no further questions, your honor. Miss Wisher rule 8.2 doesn't really address the opportunity to redirect. Nevertheless, I generally allow parties to redirect based solely on the crossexamination that occurred. Do you have any

redirect for Miss Jordan? Yes, your honor. Go ahead, Britney. with respect to um Breen adapting or sorry BSJ adapting to the graduated schedule that he is currently exercising. Um have there been issues with his behavior when the parenting time has increased? Yes. Can you describe what those issues are? He has started hitting at daycare, pulling hair, kicking. I was pulled aside this Monday [clears throat] and they've been saying that it's been certain weekends that Breen comes back and it takes about 2 days to adjust to get back on a schedule. Prior to um BSJ having

parenting time with Trevor on the every other weekend schedule he's having now, did he have any of those behavior issues? Never. Did Trevor ask for significant parenting time with BSJ before paternity was legally established? No. When um BSJ was born and even prior to his birth, did he hold out BSJ as his own child? Yes, he has. Did his family hold out BSJ as child? Hold out meaning like claiming? Yes. Yes. objection. Your honor, we never asked any questions regarding Trevor's family. Sustained. I'll treat that as a scope objection. Sustained. Britney, did you ever stop

Trevor from getting a paternity test done? No. Would you have made BSJ available for a paternity test? Yes. After he texted you stating he wanted a schedule from a mediator and a paternity test, did he take any steps to get that test done? He did not. Has BSJ ever been brought back to you in the wrong size diapers or clothing? Yes. How often is that? Um, in the beginning it was quite often. um a couple times the past month or two wrongsized diapers. Um you were asked some questions about um your concern about Trevor's marriage.

Did you have a concern about Trevor's marriage specifically or who was bonding with BSJ during the parenting time? Uh not Trevor's marriage, it's who is bonding with Breen. Okay. And what was your concern about that? Um, I didn't feel that Trevor had a full bond with him. And there's also a Fact that at a couple exchanges, Breen has called Logan mama. And Trevor has never redirected him to say that that is not his mom. You were asked some questions about um your response to the domestic violence factor in your declaration. Um, in your declaration, you

I'm just looking to that right now. You did indicate you did not describe your relationship as physically abusive. Can you describe what you experienced during your relationship? Um, I would say kind of emotionally abusive, more so if kind of if he doesn't get his way, he will sit there and glare at you and make you feel little. And you have other children, correct? I do. You've been concerned about how Trevor has acted around your other children. Objection beyond the scope. Excained. Um, you were asked some questions about, you know, you haven't been concerned about Trevor

providing appropriate care during his parenting time. Um, have you been concerned about who is the one providing the care during Trevor's parenting time? Objection. Beyond the scope. I don't overrule this objection, but your scope is narrow, Miss Wisher. Ask the question again. Britney, have you been concerned about who is providing care of Breen during Trevor's parenting time? Yes. And why do you have those concerns? Um, I do know Trevor has been working quite a few of his visitations. Um, I'm not getting offered to take care of him and then him pick him up. He's leaving

him with other people. And if you're just getting to know your son again, I feel it should be you taking care of him, you creating that bond. Britney, you were asked questions or um it was indicated that Trevor believes you have controlled the parenting time schedule. Um with the dates you have provided for parenting time, have you asked Trevor if these dates work for him? Yes, multiple times. So this is a schedule that um you believe is developmentally appropriate for Breen and that the two of you have come up with together. Is that accurate? Yes.

Um, with the March parenting time questions you were asked and the exhibit that was shown, that was March of 2026, correct? Yes. How frequently had Trevor seen BSJ prior to that time? I think he was seeing him every week. Before that, he was seeing him once a week and then we went up to two times a week and then it was not he was not choosing more time. So then I proposed a longer schedule, more time. And did the schedule just start in February of this year? I'm sorry, what? The schedule started um sometime in

the beginning of this year, I believe in February. Is that accurate? Yes. Okay. And prior to February of this year, um he be on the scope. I need to hear the whole question first. So for now, I reserve rolling on the objection. Go ahead. ask the question, Miss Wooer, or [clears throat] just ask it again. Sure. Um, so prior to the schedule being established in February, did he go frequent amounts of time without seeing him at all? Yes. You were asked some questions about the issue with the weather in April of 2026. Do you recall

that? Yes. Okay. Do you recall what the weather conditions were that day? Oh, they were terrible. My boss had sent me videos of pulling out the snow plows. Um, my nanny's dad had pulled out two snow plows prior to that. It was that wet, very wet, heavy snow and it hit us first. Was travel advised on that day? There was no travel at all. Um, and you were asked some questions about exchanges occurring in oaks. Do you recall that? Yes. Now, did you and Trevor previously live in the same area? Yes. And you currently live

in Oaks, correct? Yes, I live here. And where did Trevor live prior to his current home? He lived in Hecka, South Dakota. How far is Heeka from Oaks? About 25 minutes. Um, and Trevor decided to move. Is that correct? Correct. Did he discuss this move with you? He did not discuss it, but he told me he was moving. Um, did he discuss that exchanges should take place in a different location or just tell you he was moving? He almost told me he was moving. There was no discussion about changing locations. And following his move, did

he refuse to give you his address? Yes, multiple times. sustained death. Britney, through all this, has your main concern just been Breen's best interest? Yes. I have nothing further. All right. Thank you. Miss Lup, any other witnesses that you wish [clears throat] to call and cross-examine? Yes, your honor. I call Karen Green Meer. We will have Miss Greener. We'll admit her back from the waiting room. All right, Miss Spinmeer, can you please raise your right hand for me so I can see it? Ma'am, for the testimony you're about to give, do you swear to tell

the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I hope you got I do. You can lower your hand. Please state and spell your full name for me. Karen Greener. K A R E N G R E N M Y E R. And Miss Greener, I put you in a waiting room. I just want to confirm that you weren't able to hear or see any previous testimony. No, I was not. All right. Go ahead, Miss Lac. Thank you, your honor. Good morning, Miss Green Meyer. Good morning. You've submitted a declaration in support of Miss

Jordal in this action, correct? Yes. Uh within your declaration, you discussed BSJ's baptism, right? Yes. For BSJ's baptism, Miss Jordan appointed Preston Peterson to be BSJ's godfather. Correct. Yes. Preston is Trevor's sister's ex-boyfriend. Correct. Trevor's sister. Okay. Yes, I Yes, you're right. Um, and Trevor sister and Preston dated for about four years. True. Uh, yeah. I Yeah. Now, their relationship ended because Preston was verbally abusive. Correct. You know, I don't know all this information, so I can't I can't really say. Are you aware that Preston once screamed [ __ ] you in Trevor's sister's face

before he relevance beyond the scope? Your honor, if I to an individual who was not named in our declaration. Miss Lamp, what what portion of Miss Greener's declaration are you referring to? Yes, your honor. Um, I am referring to um, paragraph nine regarding the tension between the families, your honor. Miss Wisher, state your objection again. Um, relevance, the individual named as not a witness. Um, not even named in the declaration. Um, I I guess I'm not sure where the questioning is leading or what the relevance is to the best interest of this child at hand.

Miss Lount, the relevance objection. Uh yes, your honor. It's going towards the last statement in paragraph 9 regarding the tension uh to give context about the tension between the parties. So, are you referring to the tension between this Preston Peterson and Trevor's sister? Uh, your honor, I'm confused with the relevance here. So, you need to clear that up for me before I allow the question. Yes, your honor. um given the reasons and the treatment that Trevor Sister endured in the relationship um the tension was palpable because of who was present at the baptism and the

[clears throat] role that that person was appointed um when it's inferred that um attention was I've heard enough I'm going to overrule the objection but Miss Lump again I see limited relevance here so narrow the scope and get to the Miss Greener, you can answer the question if you know the answer. Um, the question again. I will ask a new question, Miss Greener. Um, Miss Gromire, you'd agree with me that the tension you felt could have been due to Trevor's family being uncomfort given his history with Trevor's sister. Correct. You know, I I I'm not

that's not the tension I observed. I don't really know all the relationship there. with Preston and his sister. Um, so that's not what I was referring to. Miss Greener, in paragraph 11 of your declaration, you state, "I have personally seen BSJ show resistance towards Trevor in regards to an exchange between the parties." Correct. Yes. Trevor is parenting time with BSJ approximately every other weekend with uh two weekday visits every two weeks. Correct. I guess so. I'm not there, but yes. Um, if Trevor has parenting time three times every two weeks, um, the parties have roughly

six exchanges per month. Three times every two weeks. Sure. Yes. It's fair to say that since February 2026, the parties have had approximately 30 exchanges. Correct. I guess if you do the math. Yeah. And you have only been present for two exchanges, correct? That is correct. Uh you have no personal knowledge about how the other approximate 28 exchanges went. Correct. That's correct. Are you aware that at some exchanges BSJ has been resistant to lead Trevor has had some resistance oh resistance to leave him? Yes. Just the one exchange um I had with him and um

Britney was there. I could just Tell that there was tension and he's he's very willing to go to mom. Miss Greener, that is not my question. Okay, I will repeat my question. Are you aware that at some exchanges BSJ has been resistant to leave Trevor? Objection, your honor. Um, this witness did just testify she's only been present at two exchanges. I don't know. She doesn't have personal knowledge of how the child acted at the other. Miss Brian Meyer, you can answer to the extent that you have personal knowledge. Um, just the one exchange. I have

no further questions, your honor. Well, I have a question. So, Miss Greener, I want to make sure I I understand your last response. Miss LacMP asked you whether or not you were aware of any instance that BSJ resisted leaving Trevor to go back to Britany. resisted leaving Trevor. Oh um not resisted that I am and then you said the other you said the just that one exchange and so I want to make sure I understand what your response is. Can you clarify that for me please? There was no resistance leaving Trevor. No. Um, if that's

what she's asking. I mean, not on not on the occasions that you were present. Yes. Okay. Miss LMP, did my question pose any followup from you? No, your honor. All right, Miss Wisher. Again, I I give people an opportunity to redirect even though rule 8.2 doesn't address it. Go ahead if you wish. Yes, your honor. Um, on [snorts] the exchanges that you were present, was BSJ always um did he appear closely bonded with his mother? Definitely. No other questions, your honor. All right. Thank you, Miss Freeder. Uh, is this witness here pursuant to a subpoena?

No, your honor. Miss Wisher? No, your honor. Can she be released from the sequestration order? Yes, your honor, Miss Wisher. Yes, that's fine. So, Miss Greener, what that means for you is you can stay in the hearing and listen to the other testimony if you wish. You can disconnect if you wish. You're free to go. It's entirely up to you, but I am going to mute you at least. So, uh, with that, thank you for your testimony. Have a good day. Thank you. Miss LMP, any other witnesses, evidence or testimony? Yes, I call Heather Billen

and I apologize if I'm pronouncing that incorrectly. I'll go grab her if that's okay. Yes, that's fine. I did add Heather's S25 Ultra. I'm assuming that's who we're talking about. Yes, that would be her. Is it okay if she's on mine? She can't get her phone to work. That's fine. Sorry, it's in here, but it's not working. Okay. Well, she needs to get her phone out of there. So, we're done there. Echo. Sorry. Okay. Sorry about that. No worries. Ma'am, what is your name? Heather Filune. Villune. Okay. Fill. Yes. I'll have you raise your right

hand for me, ma'am. Ma'am, for the testimony that you're about to give, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So, hope you got I do. You can lower your hand and I'll have you state and spell your full name for me for the record. Heather Filune. H E A T H E R V I L J O E N. And ma'am, I just want to confirm while you were in the waiting room, you weren't able to hear or see any of the proceedings in court? No. Right, Miss

LMP, you can go ahead and cross examine Miss Vill. Thank you, your honor. Good morning, Miss Villun. In paragraph 7, you say Britney has adjusted her work schedule to accommodate Trevor's requested parenting time and exchange schedule. Do you remember writing that? Yes. Are you aware that Britney sets the dates and times for Trevor's parenting time? Not necessarily. No. Okay. Miss Villune, you'd agree with me that if Britney has to adjust her work schedule to accommodate um the parenting time, if she uh schedules the dates and times, um it's to accommodate her schedule. Correct. Can you

repeat the question, please? Yes. Yes, absolutely. Um, Miss Phil, you need to agree with me that since Britney is the one that sets the dates and times for the parenting schedule, um, [clears throat] she has control about whether or not she'd have to leave work early. Correct? No. Miss Bill, have you ever had a conversation with Trevor regarding his parenting time with BSJ? No. Um, [clears throat] you've never personally discussed Trevor's parenting time schedule with him, right? No. So, any information regarding if or when Trevor confirms visits with Britney? That information has come from Britney.

Correct. Yes. I have no further questions, your honor. Miss Wisher any redirect? No, your honor. All right. Is this witness here pursuant to a subpoena? No, your honor. No, she's not. May she be excused from the sequestration order? Yes, your honor. M objection to that. Miss Fillian, what that means for you is that you're no longer subject to the sequestration order [clears throat] and you're no longer required to be here. So, you're free to go. You can stay if you choose. Uh you're no longer subject to that sequestration order. Okay. All right. Thank you. All

right. Thank you. Have a good day. You sir, Miss LMP, any other witnesses, evidence, or testimony? Yes. I call Jake Dortal. Um, your honor, with respect to Mr. Jordall, um, I've been made aware he's at an appointment at 10 a.m. that could not have been rescheduled. I believe he can call into this as soon as that is over. Um, so that's why he's not on right now. Well, if he's not available right now, I'm going to exclude his testimony. So, you didn't file a motion or request that before the hearing. It's now the time and

place for the hearing. the the rule is if the witness is not available to testify when the demand has been made at least 24 hours in advance that the court can't consider the testimony. So Jake Jakeall's testimony unless you can tell me something otherwise. Um that's my intention, Miss LacMPT, is that your position? Yes, your honor. Miss Wer. Um, your honor, with respect to that, he would be able to log on before the time scheduled for the hearing is to be over. I believe we are scheduled to be done at 11:30. Um, if he can

log on prior to that, we request that his testimony not be excluded. Miss LMP, do you have any other witnesses? No, your honor, I was going to reserve time for oral arguments once Miss Wisher was done with her case. So, Miss Wisher, again, the the time and place for the hearing was 9:30 until it was done. He's not present, and now is the time that he's being called. Do you have any case law or any other rule or statute that guides my decision here? Um, your honor, no, I apologize. We don't. All right. So, at

this time, the court is going to exclude Jake Jordall's declaration and not consider it. I have read it, but I will set it out of my mind when I make my decision. It will not be part of the decision. So, that's the court's order. Miss Lumpt, any other witnesses, evidence, or testimony? Uh, just reserving uh for all uh closing [clears throat] argument, your honor. No other witnesses. So, you arrest? Yes, your honor. Miss Wisher, any witnesses, evidence, or testimony? Yes, your honor. We call Trevor Assumption. Mr. Assumption, I need you to raise your right hand

and unmute yourself. Sir, for the testimony you're about to give, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, help me God. I do. You can lower your hand, and I'll need you to state and spell your full name for me. Uh, Trevor Sumption. T R E V O R S U M P T I O N. All right. Go ahead, Miss Swisser, Mr. Sumption, the declaration you filed in this case stated that you did not know whether or not you were the father of BSJ. Is that correct?

That's correct. Is it true that Britney kept you informed of things happening in her pregnancy? Yes. Um, you asked to attend her prenatal appointments. I didn't know what the appointments were, but probably Yes. Um, additionally, you asked her for ultrasound photos. Yes. So, it's fair to say that during her pregnancy, you at least held out that you were the father of BSJ. Yes. And after BSJ was born, you met him, correct? Yes. Within 24 hours of him being born? Yes. Okay. And your family was allowed to meet at BSJ at that time as well. My

mom and dad. Yes. And that was something organized by Britney, correct? Um, I don't remember if she said my mom and dad could be there, but I asked that they would be there. And it's true, in fact, that you told your family to not reach out to Britney until things were settled legally. I don't remember. I guess. Is it true to say that you held out BSJ as your son right after he was born? Yes. True that your family posted about him on Facebook right after he was born as your son. Yes, I believe so.

When was BSJ born? July 12th of 2024. And it's accurate that you and Britney had no contact from August of 2024 to October of 2024. Uh, yes. Okay. And Britney was the one who actually reached out to you in October of 20 24. Correct. Uh, yes. And in that text, I believe both of you have submitted it as an exhibit. She asked you if you intended on being a part of BSJ's life because he was recognizing faces and she wanted you to be one of them. Yes. Okay. So from the time BSJ was born until

she texted you at that point, she was the one taking care of him 100% of the time. Correct. To my knowledge. The one responsible for his nurture, development, everything that he she was responsible for at that time. She was the one doing it. Objection beyond the scope. ask the question again, please. Um, I I'll move on. I believe I had it was kind of a duplicate question. Anyways, um, Mr. Assumption, you saw BSJ briefly in October and November of 2024, correct? I believe that's stated in your declaration. Yes. And following that time, you went approximately

entire an entire year without seeing him. I want to say is around 11 months. Okay. So from December of 2024 to November of 2025, you didn't have any contact with your son. Correct. And during that time, who was his primary caregiver? Objection. Beyond the scope. Okay, I'll rephrase. Mr. assumption during that time. Is it fair to say that Britney was the one likely getting up with him each night? Yes. And getting him ready each morning? Yes. Responsible for his daily routine, medical care, comfort, and emotional well-being. Yes. In your declaration, um, paragraph 29, you stated

that BSJ is a happy on the move little guy. Correct? Yes. You said that he's super happy and smiley. Yes. Um, would you agree that he's meeting all of his developmental milestones? Yes. Would you agree that he's doing well and he's thriving? Yes. And is it fair to say that plenty of that can be attributed to Britney being his primary caregiver since birth? Objection. Beyond the scope. Uh on the beyond the scope objection, I'm going to overrule that objection. I think it's within the scope. I think it's argumentative, but nevertheless answer the question. question was,

is it um safe to agree that PSJ doing well is due can be attributed to Britney being his primary caregiver since he was born? I would say between her and the daycare, yes. Is it true that in February of 2026, that's when you began having regular parenting time with BSJ? wouldn't say it was regular, but parenting time nonetheless. Yes. Okay. So, about less than six months ago, correct? Yes. And the schedule that um Britney proposed, this started with shorter periods of time. Is [clears throat] that correct? Yes. Is it correct that even those shorter periods

of time were multiple times per week? Uh the most at most it was twice a week but a lot of times it was just once a week. Would you agree that you were essentially a stranger to BSJ at that point? Not at that point. No. Okay. And that was again following a time where you went 11 months without any contact with him. Is that correct? Yes. Do you believe when there has been that amount of time without any contact, it's appropriate to build up the relationship first? To a certain extent, yes. Um, is it true

that your parenting time started with Britney being present? Yes. And following that, um, you spent time with BSJ outside of her being present, correct? Yes. Okay. And the times for this eventually extended. Is that accurate? Yes. And now you have been having parenting time with BSJ every other weekend. Correct. Yes. Do you agree that it would have been very overwhelming to BSJ to be thrown into a new household? Back in February? Yes. Okay. So, it was appropriate to build up the schedule. Correct. for a month or two, I would say. Yes. Um, your declaration paints

a picture that you have a great relationship with BSJ. Is that correct? Yes. Do you believe this can be attributed to how you were introduced into his life on this graduated schedule? Objection, argumentative, beyond the scope. Indeed. Is it true to say that in the span of maybe two to three months, you essentially went from having no contact with BSJ to having overnights with him over the course of six months? Yes. When did your overnights begin? I believe in April was the first one. Okay. And February is when the schedule started. So it just took

about two months for that. Correct. Yes. Where did you reside in February of 2026? I would have resided in Heckler, South Dakota. And where do you currently live? I live in Wine Mirror, North Dakota. Is it true that you did not um discuss your move with Britney prior to deciding to move? No. And you did not have a discussion with her about what that would mean for your parenting time, including the transportation? No. Um, you're aware that Britney has other children? Yes. And they reside primarily with her? Yes. Would you agree that she has a

lot of responsibilities with BSJ, her other children, and work? Yes. Objection over rule um beyond the scope and argumentative. Your honor, we're discussing the transportation which was discussed in his declaration. Um, your honor, she's asking about [clears throat] the question was about Britney Jordall's other children and responsibilities. So, I'm going to sustain the objection. Trevor, is it true that after you decided to move um, you did not want to tell Britney your address? No. That's not accurate. No. Um, your move was so that you could live with your then fiance, now wife, correct? Yes. Is

it true that you have told her to call or you told BSJ to call her mama? I then No. No. In your declaration, um, you stated that you believe Britney is projecting her issues with her ex-husband on to you. Is that accurate? Yes. Now whether or not the court is considering it, you're aware that he wrote a declaration in support of Britney in response to your motion. Correct. Yes. Is it fair to say that that shows there is a good co-parenting relationship between the two of them? Objection. Argumentative overruled. Is it fair? Is it fair

to say that that would show that there is a good co-arenting relationship between the two of them? I would say now yes. Um, is it true that you have referred to Britney as a dictator? Yes. Is it true that you have told Britney your household can provide Bracken with a life that she can't? Yes. And I apologize, your honor. I'm slipping up between calling the child his name and initials. Um, Mr. Assumption, is it true that you have made other hostile comments towards Britney? Objection. Argumentative. It's a yes or no question. It's the phrasing of

the question, your honor. Ask the question again. Um, is it true that you have made other comments that Britney would be Britney would consider to be hostile towards her? Objection. Um, how is he supposed to know how what Bernie considers lack of personal knowledge sustained? [snorts] Mr. Sumption, is it true that Breen will start preschool within the next few years? Yes. And school after that? Yes. Would you agree that an hourong drive to get him to school each morning is not what's best for him? Objection beyond the scope. Yeah, we're discussing. Okay, Mr. Assumption, is

it true that approximately one year ago you received a citation for an open alcohol behavior beverage container accessible in the vehicle? Objection beyond the scope and relevance. It's in the declaration. I'm going to overrule the objection and I think it's relevant. Answer the question, Mr. assumption. Yes, I was I was given a citation for that. Yes. Okay. Is it true that you plead guilty to that? I paid a fine. Yeah. Was your license restricted for any period of time due to that citation? None. Um, in your declaration, you stated that you don't have access to

BSJ's medical records. Is that correct? I have asked Britney for them and she has not given them to me. She said I could look them up and I have not. No. Is it true that she provided you with the names of the clinic where BSJ receives his medical care? Yes, but not the provider or doctor. And you haven't contacted them to set up that access. Correct. No. Um, would you agree that Britney is a good mom? Yes. And would you agree that she wants what's best for BSJ? Yes. I have nothing further. MP redirect. Yes,

your honor. Thank you, Trevor. When Britney was pregnant with BSJ and when BSJ was born, were you 100% certain that you were his biological father? In my heart, yes. But technically, no. No. Um, you hoped, right, when you say in your heart that you were his father? Yes. And you're just asking for confirmation about your paternity. Yep. There's also a lot of questions regarding the schedule um since February 2026 to present. Um do you think uh BSJ needed the time that length of time to adjust to visits with you? I don't think so. Right away,

yes. But I would say after the first month, he knew who I was when I came over to see him and he adjusted super fast and very well. And how have the visits been going? Really good. And during that time, did you ask Britney for more time with BSJ? Yes. And what was her response? it was no or she would make up an excuse as to why that would not be in his best interest. Um, I believe there's a specific question regarding your first overnight. Your visit started early February 2026, correct? I believe I was

seeing him before that. The time I had with him by myself would have been in February. Yes. Okay. Um, and then your first overnight was at the end of April 2026, correct? Yes. So it took 3 months if not longer if you were having some supervised visits with him in January. Correct. Yes. Why were you having supervised visits in January 2026? That was per her request. Her being with uh Bernie. Yes. Do you know why she wanted supervised visits? She had never explained to me. No. And did you agree to supervise visits um so you

could see BSJ? Yes. You're asked about a comment that you stated you can provide BSJ with a life I believe life or lifestyle. I can't remember the exact phrasing that um Miss Jordel Kent. Can you explain what you meant by that comment? Um, I have a huge family with lots of younger cousins that are about Breen's age. Um, I am happily married so he can grow up showing um, how to love a partner and um, I just have a bigger home where he can have access to his own room if he needs personal space. Did

you mean by your comment that you can show him a different life than what Miss Jordan can show him? Yes. Were you trying to infer that your the life you could provide him would be better than the life she would provide him? I would say better but in a different way. Yes. I have no further questions your honor. Thank you, Mr. Sumption. Miss Wisher, any other witnesses, evidence or testimony? No, your honor. We'd rest. And with that, any closing argument, Miss Leont? Yes. Thank you, your honor. When reviewing Miss Jalle's declaration and text messages and

all the supplemental documents and pleadings, the most common theme throughout everything is her use of the words I and my. Uh [clears throat] throughout her declaration, she testifies, "I propose a schedule for March." In paragraph 12, I provided Trevor with 13 available parenting dates in paragraph 13. I extended the visit 1 hour because I wanted them to have additional time. I My focus has always been on making the decisions I believe are best for our son. Paragraph 39. Um the documents are riddled with her interjecting her schedule and what she believes is in BSSJ's best

interest. Um, the consistency and routine that BSJ has followed for the last few months has been controlled and dict dictated by her. Once Trevor got the paternity confirmation he had been asking for for months, he did everything within his power to be an active participant in BSJ's life subject to the time and dates and availability that Miss Jordan would provide him with. For months, Miss Jordle kept Trevor at arms length from BSJ because she claimed he needed a gradual and increased time to adjust. Yet, as Trevor just testified, BSJ was comfortable around Trevor within the

first month. Um, Trevor has been as patient as as anyone could expect after waiting for months to confirm he has a son. Over the last six, five, six months, Trevor has been at Miss Jalle's mercy for when and how long he could see their son. He's gradually increased his time. Yet, Miss Durtle now wants to cap their relationship to every other weekend with a few hours during the weekday. Um, Miss Dirtle doesn't like being called controlling, but that is what has happened for the last few months. Anytime Trevor wanted to see BSJ, she had to

approve the visit. Trevor wanted to move the exchange location to Winter to accommodate um the needs of his new family with BSJ and split the drive. She refused. Miss Jordan wanted exchanges at the police station. Trevor had to comply or not see BSJ. Anytime Trevor tried to ask for more time, he was met with opposition to fear of not seeing his son. It is in BSJ's best interest to have equal time with both of his parents. Both parties love BSJ unconditionally and are his primary caregiver during their respective times. Miss Joural has made no accusations

against Trevor's inability to parent beyond her being, at least in her declaration, her being BSJ's primary caregiver. There's a lot of instances within her declaration where she commends Trevor, but then goes, "However, I'm still the primary caregiver." Both parties are supported by their friends and family. Both parties encouraged BSJ's development and growth. Trevor Trevor wasn't afforded the opportunity to be involved in BSJ's life because Britney refused the Paternity test. She put her pride before BSJ's best interest. The remaining best interest factors are either neutral or don't apply in this case. Miss Jand argues she does

everything for BSJ when she restricted Trevor's um from the same access. She provided him extremely limited opportunities to be involved in his life for the last 5 6 months while hiding behind vague generalities that ESJ isn't ready when in fact the opposite is true. He has a great time with Trevor. He loves his daddy and is yearing for more time. Um [clears throat] Trevor did not agree for exchanges to be in Oaks. The drive to his house means he spends more time driving with BSJ during the weekday visits, specifically the 3:30 to 7:00 p.m. than

um he does outside the car. Nor should Trevor be responsible for half of the day daycare costs when his mother has offered to provide free daycare for the parties. Um we'd ask that each party be responsible for their own daycare fees and expenses. Ultimately, your honor, we are requesting that Trevor's motion be granted in full. It is in BSJ's best interest for the parties to have equal parenting time. Thank you. Miss Wisher. Thank you, your honor. What is undisputed in this case is that Britney has been BSJ's primary caregiver and has been since he was

born. This is a child who is 2 years old and for 11 months out of his life, his father had no contact with him, showed no interest, no didn't make any request to see him, anything like that. Um, that's half of this child's young life. Britney never refused a paternity test. Trevor simply Did not take a paternity test or make any moves towards getting a paternity test. When Trevor refused to see BSJ or didn't make any steps to see him for a year, Britney was the one taking care of him. She was the one responsible

for food, clothing, shelter, medical care, safe environment, um ensuring that he had proper development. Everything that this child needs, she was the one who provided. He has a great relationship with his siblings at her home and really he only regularly started seeing his father early this year. Um, as Trevor was essentially a stranger to BSJ at that point, for BSJ's sake, Britney did propose a graduated parenting time schedule. Um, as the text messages that have been submitted into evidence show, this was not dictated by her, but rather proposed by her, and Trevor either accepted or

rejected the dates. Um, there is negotiation between the parties. The text messages show that oftentimes he did request more time. However, what Britney has always held firm on is she's doing what is best for BSJ. And whose opinion? Well, this is Britney's opinion and shown by both parties agreeing that BSJ is doing well and he's a happy little guy. But does Mr. assumption agree that it's in BSJ's best interests that he only gets to visit 2 hours a week. Was that something he agreed to or was that something that he simply accepted because some is

better than none? I I don't believe I'm the right person to answer that question. I think he would testify now that that was not his intent. However, at the time, u my client believed they had an agreement on it. But the testimony [clears throat] was that that was what was being offered. It was being proposed by your client. She was controlling the dates and he was merely saying yes or no. I can make that date work or this date work. But isn't it fair to assume that he wanted more? Again, I believe that's a question

for Mr. Sumption. I again he was being reestablished into this child's life and what my client believed was fair was frequent visits with shorter durations of time for his developmental abilities at that point. But in her opinion yes and based on her research she had done regarding young children at that time. All right continue. Both parties have agreed that this child is doing great. He's happy and um my client does believe that this is attributed to her providing the consistent day-to-day care, comfort, guidance, and stability since birth. Um BSJ needs stability and that is one

thing that has been outlined in my client's declaration. She is the parent who is concerned about his stability um and that he relies on that and she's been the one to provide that. So, there is no reason to change this up. Now um there's again Mr. Sumption is the one who made the decision to move to wine mirror. He didn't discuss this with my client. Um and now they live in two different communities. There is lots of driving to Facilitate this parenting time and one thing my client is concerned about is the frequent exchanges that

Mr. Sumption is proposing with his proposed schedule. Um that's a lot of time for this child to spend in the vehicle paired with the fact that Mr. Sumption does have an open container citation that was issued about one year ago. Miss Whis. Yes. Isn't it true that they always lived about a half hour apart? They lived about I believe it was 25 minutes apart when the child was born when he lived in the South Dakota residence. Now I believe it is over an hour. Well, I think it was in the declarations it was an hour.

So 25 minutes to to an hour. Is is that such an appreciable difference that it should affect my decision in whether or not Mr. Sumption should have an equal opportunity to parent BSJ? Well, I believe there is a fairly large difference between 25 minutes to an hour. Um, and additionally, these are two different communities that are now an hour away from each other. um this child needs to attend preschool and school in one community um and it's just going to result in a significant amount of driving if there is an equal parenting schedule. But does

that presume is that your client presuming that the child is going to attend school in Oaks? I believe with u Mr. Assumption still working in the Oaks area, it is undisputed that Oaks will remain the child's primary community. Um I think What Mr. assumption is outlined in his declaration is that we wine mir is the home base for his family as BSJ lives in oaks and um what was outlined in his is that his wife's children um their primary residence is west Fargo so why is really split the difference between the two for their children

but does that necessarily mean that he agrees BSJ is going to be raised in oaks I I'm thinking that's rather speculative at this point wouldn't you agree with the child being two, um I think at this point he doesn't need a primary residence, so to say, but that's going to come sooner than later. So, um with the information outlined in the declarations, I believe they did have an agreement that his primary residence would be Oaks, but I if the court considers that to be speculative now, um I don't think I can accurately answer that. Can

you tell me where in the declarations it says that? Give me one moment, please. Go ahead. Paragraph 21 of Mr. assumptions declaration um states that his fiance at the time and him purchased his home in Wimmier because it's halfway between Fargo where her children's father resides and Britney. Well, that I understand, but can you point to anywhere in the declaration where Mr. Assumption is agreeing that the child is going to be raised Permanently in Oaks and that the child is going to have go to school in Oaks and needs to make deep community ties in

Oaks? Um, I I don't believe there's any information in Mr. Sumption's declaration. Well, paragraph 52 states, "Bsj has only ever lived in the Oaks area. I have no intention of moving or relocating him from his home. I'm familiar with the area and most of my extended family lives by." Okay, go ahead. Anything else? No, your honor. Um, we're requesting that our motion be granted, that my client be awarded temporary primary residential responsibility, that Mr. Sumption receive temporary parenting time every other weekend as outlined in our return to motion and motion, um, that exchanges continue to

occur in Oaks, that child support continue to be paid as ordered, and that each be responsible for one half of daycare expenses. Thank you. All right, Miss Lant, it was your motion. any rebuttal argument. Um, I think there's a lot of testimony regarding um or arguments I should say with Trevor being uninvolved and not seeing. Trevor did have a few visits in between and um he did ask for paternity tests. It's outlined in his declaration. He asked multiple times. He even asked at the hospital when he was born. Um and those requests [clears throat] were

all denied. Um, You know, Trevor, it is in BSJ's best interest that Trevor that he have the opportunity to have both parents equally involved in his life. Um, [clears throat] Trevor is being held to a standard of not being involved when there was no confirmation. And Miss Jordan even um testified that she was waiting for confirmation or waited for confirmation before there was consistent and routine parenting time with Miss Rumption. So we would just ask that the parties be awarded uh equal temporary uh parenting time um as outlined in his declaration. If this court is

inclined to award equal parenting time and Miss Sumption has issues with the 2255 schedule um Mr. Sumption is amendable to difference. There's a few different variations that we could work with. that was just what he put in to have um [clears throat] as minimal disruptions with with still acknowledging that he is younger and we don't want there to be, you know, 7 days in between exchanges cuz that could be too long for him to go without seeing either parent. Um [clears throat] thank you your honor. Well, Miss LMP, that that puts me in a difficult

position because I'm going to make a decision shortly. And so, you're proposing 2255, which has frequent transitions. Yes, your honor. and Miss Jordall is proposing or Miss Wisher on Miss Jordall's behalf is proposing an every other weekend type of situation um with fewer transitions, But your client wants equal and I think that's clear. And so one of the concerns raised by Miss Jordall is frequent transitions cause problems, but you're acknowledging that 7 days in between in a weekly basis is a problem. And so that leaves me with a 223 option. That leaves me with the

2255 option. That leaves me with a 7-day option. But some of those options have a lot of transitions and some of them have much fewer transitions. Yes, your honor. What's your client want and why? Your honor, we're proposing a 2255. Um it avoids the exchanges of a 223 that have a lot. With the 2255, we're proposing that exchanges would occur. Um he could pick up and drop off um BSJ at Britney's house on his way to from work absent, you know, there being a holiday or something else. He drives into Oaks for work. Um, and

that would be, you know, three exchanges a week approximately with the schedule proposed by Miss Jordan. There's an exchange Friday night, there's an exchange Sunday night, and then there's two exchanges on the Mondays, and there's two exchanges on the Wednesday. So, her proposal actually includes more exchanges than Mr. [clears throat] Assumptions. All right. Anything else? No, your honor. [clears throat] Again, I I have another obligation here shortly and so I am going to take the matter under advisement. I will work on a written opinion. I expect to have it out. I'm hoping by the end

of the week. If not, it will be sometime early next week, but I'm fairly confident it'll be out by Friday. [clears throat] So, uh, it'll be out soon and it will have regardless of the decision, it'll address all the issues that the parties have raised. Um, depending on what I do, it might affect child support. and child support. Uh they're a statutory party of interest and they have offered to prepare consistent child support guidelines determinations depending on the outcome of the interimm order. And so if I change, depending on what I do, that issue might

not be resolved until I hear from child support. Uh but nevertheless, the opinion expected for sure within 7 days. Anything else, Miss Lacmpt? No. Thank you, your honor. Anything else, Miss Wisher? No, your honor. All right. We are adjourned. Have a good day. Thank you. The closing exchange crystallizes the real dispute and the framework that will decide it once paternity is legally established and North Dakota law provides that a father has no enforcable right to parenting time until parentage is adjudicated under the uniform parentage act as adopted in NDCC chapter 14 to 20. Both parents

stand on equal legal footing and the court must allocate parenting time according to the child's best interests rather than reward either parents prior control of the schedule. The judge does something instructive at the very end. Rather than accept either side's framing, she reasons through the practical mechanics of the competing proposals. The father seeks a 2-2-5-5 equal schedule. The mother seeks alternating weekends, citing the disruption of frequent transitions. The judge notes the internal tension in each position. The mother objects to frequent exchanges, yet her own alternating weekend proposal once weekday visits are added generates a comparable

number of transitions. While the father's council concedes that a full week between exchanges is too long for a child this young. This is the court testing each proposal against the statutory touchstone of stability and the child's developmental needs. factors embedded in section 14-09-06.2. The judge also flags that whatever she decides may alter child support and that the state child support agency, a Statutory party in interest under North Dakota's Title 4D framework, stands ready to run guideline calculations once the residential arrangement is fixed. Consistent with the rule 8.2 two interim posture. She takes the matter under

advisement and promises a written opinion within a week rather than ruling from the bench. The broader lesson for our audience runs deeper than the schedule. Two themes dominate this record. First, paternity is the gate. A biological father who holds the child out as his own but never legally establishes parentage has no enforcable parenting rights and the months or years lost while paternity remains unconfirmed can become evidence about who the child's established caregiver is which is precisely the double bind this father describes asked to build a relationship late while being told the lateness itself counts against

him. The remedy the law offers is prompt action. Request the test, pursue the adjudication, and preserve the record that you did. Second, control of the schedule is a two-edged sword. A parent who unilaterally sets every date and condition. Even sincerely believing she is protecting the child's best interests invites exactly the controlling parent narrative that opposing council built here. and a court applying the best interest factors will scrutinize whether that control serve the child or serve the parent. The steadier path once both parents are legally recognized is genuine negotiation and documented flexibility because the same statute

that lets a court weigh stability also Lets it weigh each parents willingness to foster the child's bond with the other. In the end, a 2-year-old's schedule will be set by a judge measuring both parents against 13 statutory factors. And the parent best served is the one whose conduct on the written record looks like cooperation rather than gatekeeping.