40 N.E.3d 930
Ind. Ct. App.2015Background
- M.B., born 2011, was adjudicated a CHINS in juvenile court in January 2014 and placed in DCS custody and foster care with reunification as the goal.
- Stephanie and Dustin Choate (the Choates) are relatives (putative father’s sister and brother-in-law) who previously sought to intervene in the CHINS case to obtain placement; the juvenile court denied their intervention and they did not appeal.
- In July 2014 the Choates filed an independent Verified Emergency Petition for Custody in the trial (circuit) court seeking legal and physical custody of M.B., alleging the mother was incarcerated and the putative father was unable/unwilling to care for the child.
- DCS moved to dismiss the independent custody action, arguing the juvenile court had exclusive jurisdiction while the CHINS proceeding was pending.
- The trial court granted DCS’s motion, dismissing the Choates’ independent custody petition as conflicting with the CHINS case; the Choates appealed.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding the juvenile court had exclusive jurisdiction over custody while the CHINS proceeding remained pending and no statutory exception applied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by dismissing the Choates’ independent custody action while a CHINS proceeding was pending | Choates: Indiana statute permitting non-parents to file independent custody actions (IC 31-17-2-3(2)) allows them to seek custody contemporaneously with a CHINS case; Reynolds permits custody actions during CHINS proceedings | DCS: Juvenile court has exclusive original jurisdiction over CHINS matters (IC 31-30-1-1); only specific statutory exceptions grant concurrent jurisdiction, none of which apply here | Court: Affirmed dismissal — juvenile court has exclusive jurisdiction over custody during the pending CHINS proceeding and no applicable statutory exception existed |
Key Cases Cited
- Reynolds v. Dewees, 797 N.E.2d 798 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (held a paternity court has concurrent jurisdiction under statute to modify custody during a CHINS proceeding in limited circumstances)
- In re Custody of G.J., 796 N.E.2d 756 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (interprets IC 31-17-2-3(2) to permit nonparents to initiate independent custody actions)
- In re B.J.N., 19 N.E.3d 765 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (jurisdictional questions reviewed de novo)
- In re B.C., 9 N.E.3d 745 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (same; appellate standard for jurisdictional review)