Engel v. Engel
71 A.3d 1124
Vt.2012Background
- Married for ten years with two children; divorce proceedings filed after persistent marital problems and an incident of parental abduction in 2008.
- Family court initially granted father legal/physical rights with mother’s supervised contact and required a treatment team to coordinate therapy.
- Treatment team included the children’s therapist, pediatrician, and guardian ad litem; they could influence visitation timing under the court’s amended order.
- Mother’s visits became problematic due to interrogation about medications and boundaries; the treatment team suspended therapeutic supervision and visitation.
- From 2009 to 2011, the children progressed in therapy; father was awarded sole legal/physical rights, and mother’s contact was limited to three phased visits with supervision and eventual progression.
- The final order delegated essential decisions about expanding mother’s contact to the treatment team, which the Vermont Supreme Court held to be impermissible delegation of the court’s custody authority.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the final order impermissibly delegate custody decisions to a treatment team? | Engel argues delegation to the treatment team usurps the court’s duty. | Engel contends delegation is permissible if the court retains ultimate authority. | Yes; delegation to treatment team was impermissible and remand required. |
| Were there sufficient standards governing the treatment team’s discretion? | Engel asserts lack of objective standards renders delegation invalid. | Engel maintains broad standard aligns with child best interests. | No; lack of ascertainable standards invalidates the delegation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Knutsen v. Cegalis, 187 Vt. 99 (VT 2009) (reversing custody order; real-time review required for best interests)
- LaMoria v. LaMoria, 762 A.2d 1233 (VT 2000) (therapist time-setting allowed; court retains visitation terms)
- Cameron v. Cameron, 398 A.2d 294 (VT 1979) (court cannot delegate monitoring of custody to another entity)
- Luce v. Cushing, 177 Vt. 600 (VT 2004) (court may rely on neutral experts but must decide terms itself)
- Peters v. Pennington, 707 S.E.2d 724 (N.C. Ct. App. 2011) (neutral decision makers can craft elastic visitation if court retains control)