Opinion
No. 59814
06-14-2013
JERALDINE M. KASHUBA F/K/A JERALDINE M. ADKINS F/K/A JERALDINE M. DREXEL, Appellant, v. KEVIN J. ADKINS, Respondent.
An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.
ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
This is a fast track appeal from a district court post-divorce decree order modifying child custody. Eighth Judicial District Court, Family Court Division, Clark County; William B. Gonzalez, Judge.
Having considered the parties' arguments, the district court's supplemental order, and the appellate record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion with regard to its custody decision in this matter. See Castle v. Simmons, 120 Nev. 98, 101, 86 P.3d 1042, 1045 (2004) (providing that this court will not disturb a district court's child custody determination unless the court clearly abused its discretion). In particular, in establishing the parties' custody arrangement, the district court properly considered the evidence before it and the best interest factors and determined that, despite the distance between the parties' respective locations, it would be appropriate for them to continue to exercise a modified form of joint custody. See NRS 125.510(2) (explaining that a joint custody arrangement may be modified if doing so is in the child's best interest); Truax v. Truax, 110 Nev. 437, 438-39, 874 P.2d 10, 11 (1994) (same); see also NRS 125.480(4) (setting forth the factors that a court must consider with regard to the best interest of a child). Under the particular circumstances of this case and in light of the district court's intent to revisit the custody arrangement in the near future, we decline to disturb the court's decision.
Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
_________________, J.
Hardesty
_________________, J.
Parraguirre
_________________, J.
Cherry
cc: Hon. William B. Gonzalez, District Judge, Family Court Division
Law Office of Shell Mercer
Kevin J. Adkins
Eighth District Court Clerk