R.N., Respondent, v. D.N., Appellant. (2021)

ORDER

D.N. appeals from the trial court's judgment dissolving his marriage to R.N. and awarding sole legal and sole physical custody of their two minor children to R.N. and denying Father any contact with the children. On appeal, D.N. claims that the trial court erred in: (1) denying D.N.'s motion for continuance of trial because he was unable to secure the assistance of Dr. Gregory Sisk for trial preparation and expert trial testimony; (2) denying D.N.'s motion for continuance on the morning of trial because D.N. admitted himself to the hospital for treatment; (3) denying D.N.'s request to call the two minor children to testify regarding their choice of custodian and the sexual abuse allegations made against D.N.; (4) denying D.N.'s request that the trial court interview the two minor children in chambers regarding their choice of custodian; and (5) excluding all expert witness testimony by D.N. regarding his mental health. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

PER CURIAM: