In March 2013, three children were removed from their mother’s custody and placed with their fathers after the children were found living with the mother, Audrea Marks, in filthy conditions. More than a year later, the trial court granted joint legal custody in the first and second of Marks’s children to those children’s father, appellee Jason Soles, as well as to Marks, with Soles receiving primary physical custody. The trial court also awarded joint legal custody of Marks’s third child to that child’s father, appellee Brad Lane, as well as to Marks and the child’s paternal grandparents, with the paternal grandparents receiving primary physical custody. On appeal from these orders, Marks asserts inter alia that the trial court erred when it awarded joint custody of the third child to its paternal grandparents and when it imposed retroactive child support payments on Marks. We reverse the grant of joint legal and primary physical custody in the third child to the paternal grandparents and the imposition of retroactive child support payments on Marks, vacate the remainder of the trial court’s judgment, and remand for further proceedings.
A trial court faced with a petition for modification of child custody is charged with exercising its discretion to determine what is in the child’s best interest. Viskup v. Viskup, 291 Ga. 103, 105 2 727 SE2d 97 2012 citations omitted. A trial court’s decision regarding a change in custody / visitation will be upheld on appeal unless it is shown that the court clearly abused its discretion. Vines v. Vines, 292 Ga. 550, 552 2 739 SE2d 374 2013 citation omitted. Where there is any evidence to support the trial court’s ruling on custody or visitation, a reviewing court cannot say there was an abuse of discretion. Id.