G.S. v. S.M.L.
826 N.W.2d 916
N.D.2013Background
- J.S.L.F., born 2008 to B.F. and S.M.L., faced multiple Grand Forks County Social Services complaints for neglect and maltreatment and required hospital care for malnutrition.
- After moving to Glenburn in 2008, the family faced additional social services scrutiny over supervision and housing conditions; B.F. relocated back to Grand Forks in 2009 and had limited involvement thereafter.
- In November 2010, the mother left the child with co-petitioners and signed a co-petition consenting G.S., G.J., and K.C. to be appointed guardians; a temporary guardianship followed.
- On November 17, 2010, the mother returned with police, and an ex parte temporary guardianship was entered without notice to B.F. or a hearing.
- A 2011 hearing resulted in a determination that both parents’ rights were suspended by circumstances and that guardians G.S., G.J., and K.C. should be the child’s permanent guardians, which B.F. challenged on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether B.F.’s parental rights were suspended by circumstances. | BF argues rights were not suspended; otherwise guardianship improperly bypasses Juvenile Act. | Guardians argue suspension by circumstances justified guardianship. | Not sustained; rights not suspended; guardianship improper. |
| Whether guardianship under the Uniform Probate Code can substitute for Juvenile Court Act testing of fitness. | BF contends UPC cannot substitute for testing parental fitness under Juvenile Act. | Guardians rely on statutory guardianship provisions. | UPC proceedings inappropriate to test parental fitness; Juvenile Act controls. |
| Whether the trial court properly found abandonment as a basis for suspension by circumstances. | BF contends there was no abandonment given contact and support. | Guardians rely on abandonment-like reasoning under statutes. | Findings of abandonment not supported; no abandonment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hamers v. Guttormson, 2000 ND 93 (ND 2000) (parental rights are superior but not absolute in custody disputes)
- In re Adoption of S.R.F., 2004 ND 150 (ND 2004) (guidance on abandonment standards and custodial considerations)
- In re A.M.W., 2010 ND 154 (ND 2010) (abandonment criteria and parent-relationship analysis)
- In re A.M.M., 529 N.W.2d 864 (ND 1995) (previous adoption/custody standards in ND)
- Guardianship of Copenhaver, 124 Idaho 888, 865 P.2d 979 (Idaho 1993) (definition of suspended by circumstances as deprivation indicators)
- In re Krystal S., 584 A.2d 672 (Me. 1991) (discussion of parental fitness and guardianship)