2005 Nevada Revised Statutes - Chapter 125C — Custody and Visitation

CHAPTER 125C - CUSTODY AND VISITATION

VISITATION

NRS 125C.010 Orderawarding visitation rights must define rights with particularity and specifyhabitual residence of child.

NRS 125C.020 Rightsof noncustodial parent: Additional visits to compensate for wrongfuldeprivation of right to visit.

NRS 125C.030 Imprisonmentfor contempt for failure to comply with judgment ordering additional visit.

NRS 125C.040 Imprisonmentfor contempt: Violation of condition; failure to return when required.

NRS 125C.050 Petitionfor right of visitation for certain relatives and other persons.

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

NRS 125C.200 Consentrequired from noncustodial parent to remove child from State; permission fromcourt; change of custody.

NRS 125C.210 Childconceived as result of sexual assault: Rights of natural father convicted ofsexual assault; rights when father is spouse of victim; rebuttable presumptionupon divorce.

NRS 125C.220 Presumptionsconcerning custody and visitation when parent of child is convicted of firstdegree murder of other parent of child.

NRS 125C.230 Presumptionconcerning custody when court determines that parent or other person seekingcustody of child is perpetrator of domestic violence.

_________

VISITATION

NRS 125C.010 Orderawarding visitation rights must define rights with particularity and specifyhabitual residence of child.

1. Any order awarding a party a right of visitation ofa minor child must:

(a) Define that right with sufficient particularity to ensurethat the rights of the parties can be properly enforced and that the bestinterest of the child is achieved; and

(b) Specify that the State of Nevada or the state wherethe child resides within the United States of America is the habitual residenceof the child.

The ordermust include all specific times and other terms of the right of visitation.

2. As used in this section, sufficient particularitymeans a statement of the rights in absolute terms and not by the use of theterm reasonable or other similar term which is susceptible to differentinterpretations by the parties.

(Added to NRS by 1993, 2137; A 1995, 1493,2289)(Substituted in revision for NRS 125A.290)

NRS 125C.020 Rightsof noncustodial parent: Additional visits to compensate for wrongfuldeprivation of right to visit.

1. In a dispute concerning the rights of anoncustodial parent to visit his child, the court may, if it finds that thenoncustodial parent is being wrongfully deprived of his right to visit, enter ajudgment ordering the custodial parent to permit additional visits tocompensate for the visit of which he was deprived.

2. An additional visit must be:

(a) Of the same type and duration as the wrongfullydenied visit;

(b) Taken within 1 year after the wrongfully deniedvisit; and

(c) At a time chosen by the noncustodial parent.

3. The noncustodial parent must give the court and thecustodial parent written notice of his intention to make the additional visitat least 7 days before the proposed visit if it is to be on a weekday orweekend and at least 30 days before the proposed visit if it is to be on aholiday or vacation.

(Added to NRS by 1985, 1892)(Substituted in revisionfor NRS 125A.300)

NRS 125C.030 Imprisonmentfor contempt for failure to comply with judgment ordering additional visit.

1. A custodial parent who fails to comply with ajudgment ordering an additional visit may, upon a judgment of the court, befound guilty of contempt and sentenced to imprisonment in the county jail.During the period of imprisonment, the court may authorize his temporaryrelease from confinement during such hours and under such supervision as thecourt determines are necessary to allow him to go to and return from his placeof employment.

2. A custodial parent imprisoned for contempt pursuantto subsection 1 must be released from the jail if the court has reasonablecause to believe that he will comply with the order for the additional visit.

(Added to NRS by 1985, 1892)(Substituted in revisionfor NRS 125A.310)

NRS 125C.040 Imprisonmentfor contempt: Violation of condition; failure to return when required.

1. If a custodial parent is imprisoned for contemptpursuant to NRS 125C.030 and violatesany condition of that imprisonment, the court may:

(a) Require that he be confined to the county jail forthe remaining period of his sentence; and

(b) Deny him the privilege of a temporary release fromconfinement for his employment.

2. A custodial parent, imprisoned for contempt, whofails to return to the jail at the time required by the court after beingtemporarily released from confinement for his employment, may be deemed to haveescaped from custody and, if so, he is guilty of a misdemeanor.

(Added to NRS by 1985, 1892)(Substituted in revisionfor NRS 125A.320)

NRS 125C.050 Petitionfor right of visitation for certain relatives and other persons.

1. Except as otherwise provided in this section, if aparent of an unmarried minor child:

(a) Is deceased;

(b) Is divorced or separated from the parent who hascustody of the child;

(c) Has never been legally married to the other parentof the child, but cohabitated with the other parent and is deceased or isseparated from the other parent; or

(d) Has relinquished his parental rights or hisparental rights have been terminated,

the districtcourt in the county in which the child resides may grant to thegreat-grandparents and grandparents of the child and to other children ofeither parent of the child a reasonable right to visit the child during hisminority.

2. If the child has resided with a person with whom hehas established a meaningful relationship, the district court in the county inwhich the child resides also may grant to that person a reasonable right tovisit the child during his minority, regardless of whether the person isrelated to the child.

3. A party may seek a reasonable right to visit thechild during his minority pursuant to subsection 1 or 2 only if a parent of thechild has denied or unreasonably restricted visits with the child.

4. If a parent of the child has denied or unreasonablyrestricted visits with the child, there is a rebuttable presumption that thegranting of a right to visitation to a party seeking visitation is not in thebest interests of the child. To rebut this presumption, the party seekingvisitation must prove by clear and convincing evidence that it is in the bestinterests of the child to grant visitation.

5. The court may grant a party seeking visitationpursuant to subsection 1 or 2 a reasonable right to visit the child during hisminority only if the court finds that the party seeking visitation has rebuttedthe presumption established in subsection 4.

6. In determining whether the party seeking visitationhas rebutted the presumption established in subsection 4, the court shallconsider:

(a) The love, affection and other emotional tiesexisting between the party seeking visitation and the child.

(b) The capacity and disposition of the party seekingvisitation to:

(1) Give the child love, affection and guidanceand serve as a role model to the child;

(2) Cooperate in providing the child with food,clothing and other material needs during visitation; and

(3) Cooperate in providing the child with healthcare or alternative care recognized and permitted under the laws of this Statein lieu of health care.

(c) The prior relationship between the child and theparty seeking visitation, including, without limitation, whether the childresided with the party seeking visitation and whether the child was included inholidays and family gatherings with the party seeking visitation.

(d) The moral fitness of the party seeking visitation.

(e) The mental and physical health of the party seekingvisitation.

(f) The reasonable preference of the child, if thechild has a preference, and if the child is determined to be of sufficientmaturity to express a preference.

(g) The willingness and ability of the party seekingvisitation to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing relationshipbetween the child and the parent or parents of the child as well as with otherrelatives of the child.

(h) The medical and other needs of the child related tohealth as affected by the visitation.

(i) The support provided by the party seekingvisitation, including, without limitation, whether the party has contributed tothe financial support of the child.

(j) Any other factor arising solely from the facts andcircumstances of the particular dispute that specifically pertains to the needfor granting a right to visitation pursuant to subsection 1 or 2 against thewishes of a parent of the child.

7. If the parental rights of either or both naturalparents of a child are relinquished or terminated, and the child is placed inthe custody of a public agency or a private agency licensed to place childrenin homes, the district court in the county in which the child resides may grantto the great-grandparents and grandparents of the child and to other childrenof either parent of the child a reasonable right to visit the child during hisminority if a petition therefor is filed with the court before the date onwhich the parental rights are relinquished or terminated. In determiningwhether to grant this right to a party seeking visitation, the court must find,by a preponderance of the evidence, that the visits would be in the bestinterests of the child in light of the considerations set forth in paragraphs(a) to (i), inclusive, of subsection 6.

8. Rights to visit a child may be granted:

(a) In a divorce decree;

(b) In an order of separate maintenance; or

(c) Upon a petition filed by an eligible person:

(1) After a divorce or separation or after thedeath of a parent, or upon the relinquishment or termination of a parentalright;

(2) If the parents of the child were not legallymarried and were cohabitating, after the death of a parent or after theseparation of the parents of the child; or

(3) If the petition is based on the provisionsof subsection 2, after the eligible person ceases to reside with the child.

9. If a court terminates the parental rights of aparent who is divorced or separated, any rights previously granted pursuant tosubsection 1 also must be terminated, unless the court finds, by apreponderance of the evidence, that visits by those persons would be in thebest interests of the child.

10. For the purposes of this section, separationmeans:

(a) A legal separation or any other separation of amarried couple if the couple has lived separate and apart for 30 days or moreand has no present intention of resuming a marital relationship; or

(b) If a couple was not legally married butcohabitating, a separation of the couple if the couple has lived separate andapart for 30 days or more and has no present intention of resuming cohabitationor entering into a marital relationship.

(Added to NRS by 1979, 326; A 1985, 586; 1987, 1193;1991, 1176; 1999, 726;2001, 2712)

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

NRS 125C.200 Consentrequired from noncustodial parent to remove child from State; permission fromcourt; change of custody. If custody has beenestablished and the custodial parent intends to move his residence to a placeoutside of this State and to take the child with him, he must, as soon aspossible and before the planned move, attempt to obtain the written consent ofthe noncustodial parent to move the child from this State. If the noncustodialparent refuses to give that consent, the custodial parent shall, before heleaves this State with the child, petition the court for permission to move thechild. The failure of a parent to comply with the provisions of this sectionmay be considered as a factor if a change of custody is requested by thenoncustodial parent.

(Added to NRS by 1987, 1444; A 1999, 737)(Substitutedin revision for NRS 125A.350)

NRS 125C.210 Childconceived as result of sexual assault: Rights of natural father convicted ofsexual assault; rights when father is spouse of victim; rebuttable presumptionupon divorce.

1. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2, if achild is conceived as the result of a sexual assault and the person convictedof the sexual assault is the natural father of the child, the person has noright to custody of or visitation with the child unless the natural mother orlegal guardian consents thereto and it is in the best interest of the child.

2. The provisions of subsection 1 do not apply if theperson convicted of the sexual assault is the spouse of the victim at the timeof the sexual assault. If the persons later divorce, the conviction of sexualassault creates a rebuttable presumption that sole or joint custody of thechild by the perpetrator of the sexual assault is not in the best interest ofthe child. The court shall set forth findings that any custody or visitationarrangement ordered by the court adequately protects the child and the victimof the sexual assault.

(Added to NRS by 1993, 105; A 1995, 331)(Substitutedin revision for NRS 125A.360)

NRS 125C.220 Presumptionsconcerning custody and visitation when parent of child is convicted of firstdegree murder of other parent of child.

1. The conviction of the parent of a child for murderof the first degree of the other parent of the child creates a rebuttablepresumption that sole or joint custody of the child by the convicted parent isnot in the best interest of the child. The rebuttable presumption may beovercome only if:

(a) The court determines that:

(1) There is no other suitable guardian for thechild;

(2) The convicted parent is a suitable guardianfor the child; and

(3) The health, safety and welfare of the childare not at risk; or

(b) The child is of suitable age to signify his assentand assents to the order of the court awarding sole or joint custody of thechild to the convicted parent.

2. The conviction of the parent of a child for murderof the first degree of the other parent of the child creates a rebuttablepresumption that rights to visitation with the child are not in the bestinterest of the child and must not be granted if custody is not grantedpursuant to subsection 1. The rebuttable presumption may be overcome only if:

(a) The court determines that:

(1) The health, safety and welfare of the childare not at risk; and

(2) It will be beneficial for the child to havevisitations with the convicted parent; or

(b) The child is of suitable age to signify his assentand assents to the order of the court awarding rights to visitation with thechild to the convicted parent.

3. Until the court makes a determination pursuant tothis section, no person may bring the child into the presence of the convictedparent without the consent of the legal guardian or custodian of the child.

(Added to NRS by 1999, 742; A 1999, 2975)

NRS 125C.230 Presumptionconcerning custody when court determines that parent or other person seekingcustody of child is perpetrator of domestic violence.

1. Except as otherwise provided in NRS 125C.210 and 125C.220, a determination by the courtafter an evidentiary hearing and finding by clear and convincing evidence thateither parent or any other person seeking custody of a child has engaged in oneor more acts of domestic violence against the child, a parent of the child orany other person residing with the child creates a rebuttable presumption thatsole or joint custody of the child by the perpetrator of the domestic violenceis not in the best interest of the child. Upon making such a determination, thecourt shall set forth:

(a) Findings of fact that support the determinationthat one or more acts of domestic violence occurred; and

(b) Findings that the custody or visitation arrangementordered by the court adequately protects the child and the parent or othervictim of domestic violence who resided with the child.

2. If after an evidentiary hearing held pursuant tosubsection 1 the court determines that more than one party has engaged in actsof domestic violence, it shall, if possible, determine which person was theprimary physical aggressor. In determining which party was the primary physicalaggressor for the purposes of this section, the court shall consider:

(a) All prior acts of domestic violence involving anyof the parties;

(b) The relative severity of the injuries, if any,inflicted upon the persons involved in those prior acts of domestic violence;

(c) The likelihood of future injury;

(d) Whether, during the prior acts, one of the partiesacted in self-defense; and

(e) Any other factors that the court deems relevant tothe determination.

In such acase, if it is not possible for the court to determine which party is theprimary physical aggressor, the presumption created pursuant to subsection 1applies to each of the parties. If it is possible for the court to determinewhich party is the primary physical aggressor, the presumption created pursuantto subsection 1 applies only to the party determined by the court to be theprimary physical aggressor.

3. As used in this section, domestic violence meansthe commission of any act described in NRS33.018.

(Added to NRS by 1999, 742)

 

Disclaimer: These codes may not be the most recent version. Nevada may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.