In re Bordalo
164 N.H. 310
| N.H. | 2012Background
- Daughter, born in 2006, is the child of Mother and Father from a brief relationship.
- July 2009 parenting agreement split Daughter between Mother’s and Father’s homes, with alternating weekend exposure to Father.
- Maine/NH relocations and prior contempt filings (2009–2010) led to ordered exchanges at each parent’s home to facilitate time with Daughter.
- Guardian ad litem (GAL) appointed in 2010 amid concerns about Daughter’s welfare and possible influence of the maternal grandmother.
- In 2011 the Bordalos sought parental rights; GAL recommended Daughter reside with the Bordalos due to Daughter’s behavioral problems and concerns about Mother’s boundaries.
- June 2011 trial court awarded primary parenting to Father and Bordalos jointly, with Mother having weekend parenting time; decision later appealed by Mother.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court properly applied the Broderick test. | Mother argues the Broderick test was not satisfied. | Bordalos argue the Broderick test governs grandparent custody over a fit parent. | Court held the Broderick test was not satisfied and thus reversed. |
| Whether there was clear and convincing evidence of a significant psychological parent-child relationship with the Bordalos. | Mother contends no such significant relationship existed. | Bordalos contend evidence showed a stable grandparent parenting role. | Record failed to show a significant psychological parent-child relationship. |
| Whether the fourth Broderick requirement—necessity to protect from emotional harm—was met. | Mother argues no compelling reason to intrude on parental rights. | Bordalos contend necessity due to emotional harm risk. | Fourth requirement not met; no overriding necessity shown. |
| Whether the trial court erred by treating the dispute as between two non-fit parties rather than a fit parent versus grandparents under constitutional standards. | Mother asserts traditional parental liberty requires deference to fit parent. | Bordalos assert appropriate application of grandparent custody standards. | Court found error in applying grandparent standard over a fit parent; reversed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (U.S. 2000) (fundamental right of parents to make decisions about care and custody)
- In re Guardianship of Reena D., 163 N.H. 107 (N.H. 2011) (discusses parent’s liberty interest and standards for custody decisions)
- In the Matter of R.A., 153 N.H. 82 (N.H. 2005) (broader discussion of grandparent custody and constitutional concerns; Broderick test derivation)
- In the Matter of Jeffrey G. & Janette P., 153 N.H. 200 (N.H. 2006) (parental rights standard and fit parent's status)
- In the Matter of Diana P., 120 N.H. 791 (N.H. 1980) (early note on psychological parent-child relationships)