In re B.V., M.V., and A.V.
21-0060
| W. Va. | Jun 22, 2021Background:
- DHHR filed abuse-and-neglect petitions after J.V. disclosed that her father C.V. sexually abused her and that J.V. had an ongoing incestuous relationship with C.V.; parents were adjudicated abusing parents and J.V.’s parental rights were terminated.
- Petitioner (grandmother N.V.) moved to intervene and sought permanent placement of the three children; a home study (completed by Ohio agency) indicated the home would likely pass but raised concerns.
- At prior dispositional hearings J.V. testified that petitioner knew about prior sexual abuse of J.V. as a child, blamed J.V., and failed to protect her; J.V. did not want her children placed with petitioner.
- At the permanent-placement hearing petitioner emphasized a longstanding bond with the children, contested some accusations about her knowledge, and testified she would protect the children if granted custody.
- The circuit court found J.V.’s testimony credible, concluded petitioner had previously failed to protect J.V. from sexual abuse and therefore could not be relied on to protect the children, and denied permanent placement; the mother’s termination was previously affirmed on appeal.
- On appeal petitioner argued the court erred (factual findings, best-interest analysis, and weight due petitioner’s bond and a suitable home); the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed.
Issues:
| Issue | Petitioner (N.V.) | DHHR / Guardian | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether placement with grandmother was in the children’s best interests given the grandparent preference | Grandmother: strong bond, home suitable, will protect children | DHHR/Guardian: grandparent previously failed to protect J.V.; credibility concerns; placement unsafe | Court: Denial affirmed — grandparent preference overcome because placement not in children’s best interests given petitioner’s past failure to protect |
| Whether the circuit court’s factual findings (credibility of J.V.) were clearly erroneous | Grandmother: findings are clearly erroneous in light of the record | DHHR/Guardian: trial court credibility findings entitled to deference | Court: No clear error — trial court’s credibility determinations upheld |
| Whether a favorable home study required placement despite other concerns | Grandmother: home would/should pass and is sufficient for placement | DHHR/Guardian: home study concerns and best-interest reasons can outweigh a passable home | Court: Home-study suitability is not dispositive; placement may be denied even if home is acceptable |
Key Cases Cited
- In Interest of Tiffany Marie S., 196 W. Va. 223, 470 S.E.2d 177 (W. Va. 1996) (standard of review and deference to circuit court factual findings in bench trials)
- In re Cecil T., 228 W. Va. 89, 717 S.E.2d 873 (W. Va. 2011) (applies standard of review for abuse-and-neglect findings)
- In re P.F., 243 W. Va. 569, 848 S.E.2d 826 (W. Va. 2020) (grandparent placement preference and limits)
- Michael D.C. v. Wanda L.C., 201 W. Va. 381, 497 S.E.2d 531 (W. Va. 1997) (deference to trial court credibility determinations)
- Napoleon S. v. Walker, 217 W. Va. 254, 617 S.E.2d 801 (W. Va. 2005) (distinguishable grandparent-placement reversal where grandparents agreed to restrict contact)