In Re the Custody of M.B. B/N/F S.C. and D.C. v. S.B. and S.W.
51 N.E.3d 230
| Ind. | 2016Background
- M.B. is a five-year-old child of S.B. and S.W.; a CHINS petition was filed in January 2014 with reunification planned and M.B. placed with relatives.
- During CHINS pendency, paternal aunt S.C. and paternal uncle D.C. filed an emergency petition for custody in July 2014 in Posey County, seeking full legal and physical custody; court later denied their motion to intervene in CHINS and they filed an independent custody action in circuit court.
- GAL report indicated Aunt/Uncle were not suitable custodians; prior incidents included meth exposure and prior adverse interactions affecting M.B.’s placement.
- The circuit court dismissed the independent custody action for lack of standing and lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to the pending CHINS in juvenile court.
- Indiana Supreme Court held Aunt/Uncle had standing to file an independent custody action and the circuit court had subject matter jurisdiction, but a CHINS proceeding pending in juvenile court requires abstention/stay of the circuit court’s custody action until CHINS concludes; court noted mootness since CHINS was terminated in 2015.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does 31-17-2-3(2) grant standing to non-parents to file custody action? | Aunt/Uncle qualify as a person other than a parent. | Standing not established under the statute or procedural posture. | Yes; Aunt/Uncle have standing. |
| Does the circuit court have subject matter jurisdiction to hear an independent custody action while a CHINS case is pending in juvenile court? | Circuit court can hear custody actions concurrently where jurisdiction exists. | Juvenile court’s exclusive CHINS jurisdiction precludes circuit-court custody action. | Circuit court has subject matter jurisdiction but should abstain/stay until CHINS concludes. |
| Should the circuit court abstain or stay the independent custody action when CHINS is pending? | Abstention not required; action should proceed to resolution. | Abstention or stay is required to avoid conflicting proceedings. | Abstain and stay the custody action until CHINS concludes. |
| If CHINS has ended, is the independent custody action moot? | Proceed to merits once CHINS concluded; mootness resolved only if CHINS still pending. | mootness defeats further action if issues resolved. | Mootness resolved in favor of continuing once CHINS ends; reversible for abstention framework. |
| Did the court err in dismissing for lack of standing and jurisdiction? | Dismissal was error; Superior court should address custody action with stay. | Dismissal aligns with proper jurisdictional framework. | Yes; dismissal reversed; remand with guidance to stay pending CHINS. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re G.J., 796 N.E.2d 756 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (standing for independent custody action by non-parents)
- Matter of Lawrance, 579 N.E.2d 32 (Ind. 1991) (public-interest considerations and mootness in appellate review)
- Kozlowski v. Dordieski, 849 N.E.2d 535 (Ind. 2006) (difference between jurisdiction and exercise of jurisdiction; abstention concept)
- England v. Louisiana State Bd. of Medical Examiners, 375 U.S. 411 (U.S. 1964) (abstention as postponement of jurisdiction rather than abdication)
- State v. Sproles, 672 N.E.2d 1353 (Ind. 1996) (statutory basis for jurisdiction; concurrent original jurisdiction)