Gerald Christopher Schmitt v. Chantell Marie Grimm

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 17-0715
Filed February 21, 2018
GERALD CHRISTOPHER SCHMITT,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
CHANTELL MARIE GRIMM,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Joel D. Yates,
Judge.
A mother appeals the district court’s decision placing the parties’ child in the
father’s physical care. AFFIRMED.
Cynthia D. Hucks of Box & Box Attorneys, Ottumwa, for appellant.
Edward M. Conrad of Iowa Legal Aid, Ottumwa, for appellee.
Considered by Vogel, P.J., Potterfield, J., and Scott, S.J.*
*Senior judge assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206 (2018).
2
VOGEL, Presiding Judge.
Chantell Grimm appeals the district court’s decision placing the parties’
child, born in 2011, in Gerald Schmitt’s physical care. Chantell asserts Gerald’s
life is too unstable, he tries to undermine her relationship with the child, and he
lacks credibility. She claims she can provide the child a more stable life and would
provide a more nurturing, healthy, and wholesome environment. Gerald defends
the district court’s decision to place the child in his physical care.
In deciding which placement would be in the child’s best interest, the district
court noted, “This case takes place at the intersection of: mistrust,
misunderstanding, miscommunication, and misbehaviors.” Both parents have had
significant challenges with controlled substances and sporadic employment, and
the parties’ relationship has been tumultuous. The child was placed in Gerald’s
physical care during the pendency of the proceeding, and the district court
determined the child was doing well in that placement through the testimony of the
child’s teacher, which the district court considered “critical to the court when trying
to figure out [the child’s] long-term best interests.” The court noted the teacher
described the child as “loving, caring, bubbly, social, a good friend, and a happy
child.” The teacher also stated the child has been clean and presentable and has
tested well academically. The court found Gerald more credible than Chantell, and
“[w]ith some hesitancy and some reluctanc[e],” placed the child with Gerald
because he had demonstrated “a stronger commitment to [the child’s] best
interests, a greater stability in his routine and employment, and continuity in the
care for [the child].”
3
Upon our de novo review of the record, see Ruden v. Peach, 904 N.W.2d
410, 412 (Iowa Ct. App. 2017), we affirm the district court’s decision pursuant to
Iowa Court Rule 21.26(1)(a), (d), and (e).
AFFIRMED.