Shane Parker v. Brittany Parker

── Shane Parker v. Brittany Parker ── Court: Court of Appeals of Kentucky Date: May 22, 2026 Author: Karem Category: General RENDERED: MAY 22, 2026; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2025-CA-0266-MR SHANE PARKER AND KRISTA HUNTER APPELLANTS APPEAL FROM WHITLEY CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE PAUL K. WINCHESTER, JUDGE ACTION NO. 22-CI-00267 BRITTANY PARKER APPELLEE OPINION DISMISSING IN PART, VACATING AND REMANDING IN PART ** ** ** ** ** BEFORE: EASTON, KAREM, AND TAYLOR, JUDGES. KAREM, JUDGE: Shane Parker (“Father”) and Krista Hunter (“Mother”),1 the biological parents2 of S.D.L.P. and K.M.P., appeal pro se from the Whitley Circuit Court’s order awarding “sole custody and control” of S.D.L.P. and K.M.P. to their former stepmother, Brittany Parker (“Brittany”). Neither Father nor Mother is represented by counsel. And only Father filed a brief in support of the appeal. On appeal, Biological Parents argue that clear and convincing evidence did not support the circuit court’s finding that Father was an unfit parent; that the circuit court erred in failing to join Mother as a party pursuant to Kentucky Rule of Civil Procedure (“CR”) 19; and, that the circuit court ignored a 2016 juvenile court finding of child abuse restricting Brittany’s contact with S.D.L.P. and K.M.P. Brittany, also pro se, failed to file an appellee brief.3 Based on our review of the record and applicable law, because S.D.L.P. has reached the age of majority, we dismiss this appeal as it relates to 1 As we will discuss later in this Opinion, although Mother was not included on the notice of appeal in this case, this Court entered an order on December 30, 2025, granting Father’s motion to allow Mother to intervene. 2 We refer to Father and Mother collectively as the “Biological Parents” herein. They never married. 3 On April 1, 2025, Brittany filed “Appellee’s Brief in Opposition to Appeal.” On April 9, 2025, this Court sent Brittany a “Notice of Premature Brief” and returned her brief. No other document was filed by Brittany. -2- him. We vacate the custody order as it relates to K.M.P.4 as void ab initio because Mother was an indispensable party and was not joined in circuit court. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Father and Brittany married on June 10, 2015. They had no children together; however, Father had two (2) minor children at the time of his and Brittany’s marriage: S.D.L.P., born in December 2006, and K.M.P., born in December 2008. Father and Mother had joint custody of the children with the children residing primarily with Father pursuant to an agreed order entered in Clark Circuit Court on February 23, 2016. Father and Brittany separated in June 2020. On June 6, 2022, Brittany filed a petition for an emergency protective order (“EPO”) in Whitley District Court for herself and on behalf of the children which the district court granted that same day. Approximately one month later, on July 7, 2022, Brittany filed a petition for dissolution of marriage with Whitley Circuit Court. On July 12, 2022, the district court entered a domestic violence order (“DVO”) wherein it found that Father had committed domestic violence against 4 K.M.P. will not be eighteen (18) until December 2026; therefore, we decline to dismiss the entire appeal as moot. However, we recognize that the no-contact provisions of the DVO do not expire until July 2026, and the DVO could very well be extended or amended beyond the date that K.M.P. reaches the age of majority. Nevertheless, we will proceed with an analysis of the issues raised by the Biological Parents on appeal. -3- Brittany an