The Georgia Court of Appeals recently ruled on a significant child custody dispute between Margaret Hether and Justin Tyler Campbell. The court's decision on June 15, 2026, reversed a trial court's order that had granted Campbell primary custody of their child. This ruling is important as it clarifies the authority of trial courts in custody cases, particularly regarding the necessity of a material change in circumstances before modifying custody arrangements.
This case, known as Hether v. Campbell (docket number A26A0347), marks the second time this custody matter has been brought before the Georgia Court of Appeals. The ruling affects both parents and, most importantly, their minor child, as it determines who will have primary custody moving forward.
Background
Margaret Hether and Justin Tyler Campbell, who were never married, share one minor child. In 2018, a Tennessee court granted Hether primary physical custody and sole educational decision-making authority. In 2020, the Tennessee court allowed Hether to move to Georgia with the child while maintaining her decision-making authority but requiring her to consult Campbell on significant welfare decisions.
In 2023, Hether informed Campbell of her plans to move to Utah, prompting Campbell to file a petition in Catoosa County Superior Court. He sought to enforce the Tennessee custody order and modify visitation and child support, arguing that Hether should not be allowed to relocate with their child. In May 2024, the trial court ruled that Hether's move to Utah did not constitute a material change in circumstances, yet it still awarded Campbell primary educational decision-making authority and included a self-executing provision that would automatically grant him custody if Hether moved.
The Ruling
The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's decision, stating that the trial court had no authority to modify custody or decision-making authority without finding a material change in circumstances. The court noted, "the trial court is required to enter an appropriate disposition that reconciles with the appellate court’s ruling." This ruling emphasized that the trial court's prior finding of no material change in circumstances remained binding.
In its opinion, the court clarified that the trial court should not have held a new trial or made new findings of fact since the previous ruling had already determined that no material change had occurred. The court stated, "the decision-making and custody rulings in the second modification order are reversed, and upon remittitur, the trial court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with the holdings in Hether I." The judges involved in this decision were Presiding Judge Doyle, Judge Davis, and Senior Judge Fuller.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for child custody cases in Georgia. It reinforces the principle that trial courts cannot modify custody arrangements without a clear finding of a material change in circumstances. This decision ensures that parents cannot be subjected to repeated custody modifications without substantial evidence supporting such changes.
Moreover, this ruling may affect how future custody disputes are handled, as it sets a precedent that emphasizes the importance of adhering to prior court decisions. It serves as a reminder that appellate courts expect lower courts to follow their directives closely, particularly in family law matters where the well-being of children is at stake.
What’s Next
The trial court's ruling can potentially be appealed further, but it is unclear if Campbell will pursue that option. The court noted that Campbell could file a new modification petition based on events occurring after the original ruling in May 2024. However, he cannot relitigate whether a material change occurred prior to that ruling. The case remains a critical example of the complexities involved in child custody disputes and the legal standards that govern them.