Harrison v. Phillips
422 S.W.3d 188
Ark. Ct. App.2012Background
- This is a grandparent visitation dispute involving Summer Harrison and her son S.P. (age ten).
- The Faulkner County Circuit Court ordered grandparent visitation with Dale and Carol Phillips on March 14, 2011.
- Summer appeals contending abuse of discretion and evidentiary insufficiency; she also raises a constitutional challenge to Ark. Code Ann. § 9-13-103 as applied, but preservation is lacking.
- The court previously granted Summer and Lee Phillips custody arrangements and limited or suspended visitation over the years due to concerns about maltreatment and safety.
- Paternal grandparents sought intervention and visitation; the court held a hearing on December 8, 2010, and issued a written order awarding visitation.
- The appellate court reverses, holding that the appellees failed to rebut the statutory presumption that visitation was not in S.P.’s best interest and that the trial court erred by not issuing written findings of fact.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the award of grandparent visitation was an abuse of discretion | Harrison argues Phillipses failed to rebut the best-interest presumption | Phillipses contend visitation is in best interest and supported by evidence | Abuse of discretion; decision reversed |
| Whether the appellees proved a significant and viable relationship | Harrison asserts insufficient evidence of a significant relationship | Phillipses claim prior, substantial relationship existed | Evidence supported a significant relationship but failed to rebut the presumption on best interests |
| Whether visitation is in the child’s best interest under §9-13-103(c)(2)(B) | Best interest not proven by the evidence | Best interest shown by relationship and welfare considerations | Not proven; presumption not rebutted |
| Whether the court complied with the Act’s written-finding requirement | Court did not issue written findings | Findings were unnecessary or implicit | Violation; required written findings not provided |
Key Cases Cited
- Brandt v. Willhite, 98 Ark. App. 350, 255 S.W.3d 491 (Ark. App. 2007) (recognizes substantial pre-petition contact can establish a viable relationship)
- Bowen v. Bowen, 2012 Ark. App. 403, 421 S.W.3d 339 (Ark. App. 2012) (award reversed where loss of relationship not shown to harm child)
- Oldham v. Morgan, 372 Ark. 159, 271 S.W.3d 507 (Ark. 2008) (abuse of discretion standard for visitation decisions)