321 Ga. App. 891
Ga. Ct. App.2013Background
- Esaskys appeal final adoption decree awarding parental rights to S.S. and visitation to her grandmother Ford.
- Trial court terminated S.S.’s biological parents’ rights and granted adoption to the Esaskys; Ford sought visitation.
- Esaskys objected to Ford’s visitation; Ford did not file a brief on appeal.
- Trial court did not issue specific written findings of fact as required by OCGA § 19-7-3 (c)(1).
- Court held that, generally, adoption severs grandparent visitation, but an exception allows reasonable grandparent visitation when certain conditions exist and written findings are required.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred by granting visitation without written findings | Esaskys contend lack of written findings violates OCGA § 19-7-3 (c)(1) | Ford argues visitation can be supported under statute despite lack of findings | Vacate visitation order; remand for written findings under OCGA § 19-7-3 (c)(1) |
| Whether evidence supported grandparent visitation under OCGA § 19-7-3 (c)(1) | No clear and convincing evidence under A, B, D; C shows diminishing visits | Visitation could be justified given health/welfare concerns and best interests | Evidence failed to show required factors; insufficient to sustain visitation without proper written findings |
Key Cases Cited
- Luke v. Luke, 280 Ga. App. 607 (2006) (standard of review for grandparent visitation)
- Hudgins v. Harding, 313 Ga. App. 613 (2012) (adoption generally severs grandparent visitation; exception applies)
- Sheppard v. McCraney, 317 Ga. App. 91 (2012) (due process requires clear and convincing standard for visitation evidence)
- Cates v. Jamison, 301 Ga. App. 441 (2009) (need for specific written findings of fact to justify visitation)