In re the Grandparents/Grandchild Contact of C.A.G.
376 Mont. 540
Mont.2014Background
- Angela and Paul Gardner had two children; Paul died during dissolution of the marriage. Claire Gardner is the paternal grandmother who petitioned for grandparent-grandchild contact.
- Claire sought regular phone contact, occasional weekend visits in Billings, and two weeks each summer at her home in Washington; she would pay travel and give advance notice.
- Claire previously lived with the family for extended periods and provided substantial childcare; relationship between Angela and Claire deteriorated after the separation and Paul’s death.
- Angela is a fit parent, does not oppose contact generally, but objected to extended out-of-state (Washington) visits citing Claire’s pain-medication use, physical limitations, limited recent contact, and the children’s young ages/special needs.
- District Court granted the contact plan including the out-of-state visits; Court of Appeals reviewed statutory requirements for grandparent contact and the presumption favoring a fit parent’s wishes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether district court misapplied grandparent-contact statute by granting visitation over mother’s objection | Gardner argued Troxel/Polasek require deference to fit parent; she opposed extended Washington visits and that presumption was not rebutted | Claire argued continued, long-term relationship and evidence of competence justified visits, including extended summer stays | Affirmed in part: court upheld phone/short local visits but reversed and remanded to strike extended Washington visits for failing to rebut presumption in favor of mother’s wishes |
| Whether district court improperly inserted parenting-plan rights into grandparent contact plan | Gardner argued plan used parenting-plan terminology and improperly conferred decision-making authority to Claire | Claire argued terminology did not change statutory scope and the plan only required information sharing, not decision-making power | Held: No error—the plan’s substance complied with grandparent-contact statute and did not create parental decision-making rights |
Key Cases Cited
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (invalidated overly broad visitation statute and emphasized deference to fit parents’ determinations)
- Polasek v. Ornara, 136 P.3d 519 (Mont. 2006) (Montana court interpreted grandparent-contact statute consistent with Troxel)
- Snyder v. Spaulding, 235 P.3d 578 (Mont. 2010) (parenting-plan standards are not appropriate for grandparent-contact orders)