Jeffrey Murray v. Christine Jones

Syllabus

The plaintiff, Jeffrey Murray, appealed from the Family Court's denial of his motion to modify visitation and contact with the two children he shares with the defendant, Christine Jones. Before the Supreme Court, Mr. Murray argued that the trial justice erred in finding a lack of evidence to demonstrate that it was in the children's best interests to visit or have contact with him, that the trial justice should not have accepted as credible Ms. Jones's \biased\ testimony regarding the children's preferences, and that the trial justice should have interviewed the children or had a child psychologist interview the children. The Supreme Court concluded that Mr. Murray did not provide evidence as to why contact with him would be in the children's best interests. The Court further concluded that the trial justice's determination of Ms. Jones's testimony as credible was entitled to deference and, finally, that the trial justice was not required to take evidence from a child psychologist. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the order of the Family Court.