In Re Joseph W., Jr.
21 A.3d 723
| Conn. | 2011Background
- Commissioner filed neglect petitions for Joseph W., Jr. and Daniel W.; mother pled nolo contendere and father did not plead; court adjudicated neglect and committed children to the Commissioner.
- Father later moved to open the neglect adjudications, arguing he should have been allowed to speak/enter a plea; the court denied opening but allowed a future contest if he could prove custodial status.
- At the termination hearing the court found the father not custodial and thus not able to contest neglect; parental rights were terminated; Appellate Court reversed found custodial status; issue arose whether a noncustodial parent may contest neglect.
- This Court held that a noncustodial parent may contest neglect regardless of custodial status, affirming the Appellate Court on alternate grounds.
- The opinion discusses predictive neglect doctrine, procedural history, and statutory/practice-book provisions governing pleas in neglect proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Can a noncustodial parent enter a plea in neglect proceedings to contest neglect? | Commissioner argues noncustodial cannot plead. | Father argues he is entitled to plead to contest neglect. | Yes, noncustodial may plead to contest neglect. |
| What is the proper disposition of the neglect adjudication opened by the father’s pleading? | Commissioner opposes unconditional opening. | Father seeks to open and contest neglect irrespective of custodial status. | Trial court should have granted unconditionally the motion to open. |
| Did Appellate Court correctly reverse based on custodial status grounds or on the broader entitlement to contest neglect? | Appellate Court erred by reversing on custodial status grounds. | Father was entitled to contest neglect regardless of custodial status. | Appellate Court proper to reverse on alternate ground that noncustodial may contest neglect. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re David L., 54 Conn. App. 185 (1999) (noncustodial father had right to participate in adjudicatory phase to contest neglect, not to deny responsibility for neglect)
- In re Stephen M., 109 Conn. App. 644 (2008) (findings in earlier child welfare proceedings cannot be attacked collaterally)
- In re Valerie D., 223 Conn. 492 (1992) (when both parents named, reflects custodial status questions in neglect actions)
- In re T.K., 105 Conn. App. 502 (2008) (predictive neglect and initial custody considerations after birth)