Moix v. Moix (Majority, with Dissenting)
Annotate this CaseJohn and Libby were divorced pursuant to a decree that incorporated the parties' settlement agreement. The settlement agreement provided that Libby would serve as the primary custodian of the parties' three sons and Appellant would receive reasonable visitation. The agreement also stated that neither party was to have overnight guests of the opposite sex. The circuit court later entered an order modifying visitation to restrict John's visitation to R.M., who was five years old at the time. When R.M. turned twelve years old, John filed a motion for modification of visitation to allow for, among other things, overnight visits with R.M. The circuit court granted John's motion, finding there had been a material change in circumstances and that it was in R.M.'s best interest to have more time with his father. However, the court imposed a non-cohabitation restriction preventing John's boyfriend, with whom John was in a committed long-term relationship, from being present during any overnight visits. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the circuit court erred in failing to make a finding as to whether the non-cohabitation provision was in the best interest of R.M. Remanded.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.