A nonsmoking father sought but failed to obtain a change in custody on the basis of, inter alia, a change in circumstance and the fact that the mother smoked in the presence of children who were allergic to smoke.  Though the lower court found that circumstances were not so changed as to warrant a change in custody, it did acknowledge the fact that smoking was detrimental to the children.  The mother was forbidden to smoke in the home or allow anyone else to smoke in the home; the chancellor “made it clear that he would exercise continuing jurisdiction over the parties to insure compliance with that order.”

1989 WL 5399, No. CA 88-224 (Ark. Ct. App. 1989).