context: Because the trial court did not follow the statutory methodology when it made its custody determination, and application of that methodology on remand will require the court to make factual findings that may be dependent on the court's assessment of the parties' credibility, we decline to exercise our discretion to review the case de novo, and, instead, we vacate and remand.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 248 Or App 616, 618, 623
citation_a.parenthetical: declining to exercise de novo review and instead vacating and remanding the trial court's custody judgment because the trial court did not afford the statutory preference to the primary caregiver
citation_a.sentence: See Olson and Olson, 218 Or App 1, 16, 178 P3d 272 (2008) (“[A] trial court’s *** award must reflect the exercise of discretion under the correct methodology, and it must lie within the range of legally permissible outcomes.”); see also Nice v. Townley, 248 Or App 616, 618, 623, 274 P3d 227 (2012) (declining to exercise de novo review and instead vacating and remanding the trial court’s custody judgment because the trial court did not afford the statutory preference to the primary caregiver).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 218 Or App 1, 16
citation_b.parenthetical: "[A] trial court's *** award must reflect the exercise of discretion under the correct methodology, and it must lie within the range of legally permissible outcomes."
citation_b.sentence: See Olson and Olson, 218 Or App 1, 16, 178 P3d 272 (2008) (“[A] trial court’s *** award must reflect the exercise of discretion under the correct methodology, and it must lie within the range of legally permissible outcomes.”); see also Nice v. Townley, 248 Or App 616, 618, 623, 274 P3d 227 (2012) (declining to exercise de novo review and instead vacating and remanding the trial court’s custody judgment because the trial court did not afford the statutory preference to the primary caregiver).