¶1(concurring specially).
¶2I write separately because I would reach the issue of judicial immunity for respondent Charles M. Cutler.
¶3In my view, the district court in effect delegated selection of the custody evaluator to the parties, at their request. The parties then jointly chose Cutler (notwithstanding that the father deferred to the selection made by appellant Zagaros). In this fact situation, Cutler comes to court with the same judicial immunity that he would enjoy had the district court appointed him directly.