In Re Karen Nicole CRUMBLEY
404 S.W.3d 156
| Tex. App. | 2013Background
- Crumbley and Schane were appointed as temporary joint managing conservators with Crumbley allowed to establish the child’s primary residence in Titus County.
- Crumbley filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to set aside the trial court’s temporary orders and to dismiss Schane’s conservatorship petition with prejudice.
- Schane filed a petition alleging she met the standing requirements of Tex. Fam. Code § 102.003(a)(9) and that appointment of Crumbley would threaten the child’s welfare.
- The trial court found Schane had actual care, control, and possession for the required period and denied Crumbley’s plea to the jurisdiction.
- The appellate court held Crumbley lacked standing under § 102.003(a)(9) because the time with the child did not establish exclusive possession, but abused the second conservatorship issue by not making explicit findings.
- The court sustained Crumbley’s second point and conditionally granted mandamus, ordering the trial court to withdraw its February 6, 2013 order if it did not act accordingly within 20 days.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to seek conservatorship | Crumbley contends lack of standing due to insufficient time of care. | Schane argues she met § 102.003(a)(9) and trial court approval stands. | Standing affirmed for trial court’s ruling on presumption. |
| Appointment as joint managing conservator | Crumbley argues no finding that sole appointment would significantly impair health or development. | Schane asserts appointment complied with best interests presumption with rebuttal lacking explicit findings. | Trial court erred by lacking explicit findings; but mandamus remains to address the issue. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Wells, 373 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2012) (mandamus to challenge nonparent custody orders)
- In re Herring, 221 S.W.3d 729 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2007) (mandamus appropriate for temporary custody orders)
- In re Derzapf, 219 S.W.3d 327 (Tex. 2007) (orig. proceeding; mandamus relief for temporary orders)
- In re Sullivan, 157 S.W.3d 911 (Tex. App.—Houston 2005) (restrictive jurisdictional review in standing inquiry)
- Bland Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547 (Tex. 2000) (confines evidence to jurisdictional issues)
- Worford v. Stamper, 801 S.W.2d 108 (Tex. 1990) (implied findings and standard of review for judgments)