Rashae J. v. James J.

── Rashae J. v. James J. ── Court: Alaska Supreme Court Date: April 15, 2026 Category: General NOTICE Memorandum decisions of this court do not create legal precedent. A party wishing to cite such a decision in a brief or at oral argument should review Alaska Appellate Rule 214(d). THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA RASHAE J., ) ) Supreme Court No. S-19110 Appellant, ) ) Superior Court No. 3AN-21-08619 CI v. ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION JAMES J., ) AND JUDGMENT* ) Appellee. ) No. 2142 – April 15, 2026 ) Appeal from the Superior Court of the State of Alaska, Third Judicial District, Anchorage, Una Gandbhir, Judge. Appearances: Rashae J., pro se, Chugiak, Appellant. James J., pro se, Eagle River, Appellee. Before: Carney, Chief Justice, and Borghesan, Henderson, Pate, and Oravec, Justices. INTRODUCTION A superior court modified a child custody arrangement, determining that the parents’ ongoing acrimonious relationship constituted a substantial change in circumstances and that modification would serve the best interests of the children. The children’s mother appeals, arguing that the court abused its discretion in determining that there had been a change of circumstances and in modifying custody. We conclude that the court failed to make sufficient findings to support its decision that there had * Entered under Alaska Appellate Rule 214. been a substantial change in circumstances warranting modification of the parents’ custody plan. We therefore vacate the order modifying custody and remand the matter to the superior court. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS A. Original Custody Agreement This is the second time that Rashae and James J. are before us.1 James and Rashae married in April 2005 and have six children, who were ages 9 through 17 at the time of the hearing underlying this appeal. 2 James moved out of the marital home in May 2019 and filed for divorce in November 2021. 3 During the parties’ initial divorce trial, each testified regarding domestic violence allegedly committed by the other. 4 The court found that the evidence was insufficient to apply the domestic violence presumption because it was unable to determine who had been the aggressor in the context of the alleged incidents. 5 However, the court explained that the alleged incidents demonstrated “mutual distrust, anger, [and] ongoing arguments” and found that “both parties [had] anger issues.” The court issued a custody decision on the record in November 2022, ordering that the parties would have joint legal custody of the children and that Rashae would have primary physical custody.6 The court ordered that during the school year, James would have visitation every other weekend from Friday afternoon until Sunday evening. During the summer, the parents would alternate weeks, with the option to 1 James J. v. Rashae J., Nos. S-18630/18670, 2024 WL 4372213 (Alaska Oct. 2, 2024). Initials are used in lieu of the parties’ last name to protect their privacy. 2 Id. at *1. 3 Id. 4 Id. at *2. 5 Id. 6 Id. -2- 2142 extend visitation by a week to accommodate vacation travel. The court ordered that Rashae and James could agree to other arrangements, but that the court’s schedule would be the default in the ab