In Re the Guardianship of A.J.A. and L.M.A., Minor Children J.C. v. J.B. and S.B.
991 N.E.2d 110
Ind.2013Background
- M.A. murdered C.A. in 2008 in the presence of their two children; guardians J.B. and S.B. obtain guardianship over the minors' person and estate.
- Grandmother J.C. sought grandparent visitation; initial informal Sunday visitation arranged and later violated with jail visit and other no-contact orders.
- Trial court initially granted visitation in 2009 after a contested proceeding; Guardians later sought relief and the order was amended.
- By 2012 the trial court found the 2009 visitation order void for lack of subject-matter standing and vacated it; remanded actions were pursued.
- Court of Appeals reversed; Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer to address whether Grandmother had standing and whether the 2009 order was void ab initio.
- The Supreme Court held Grandmother had no standing under the Grandparent Visitation Statute and that the 2009 order was void ab initio, affirming the trial court’s vacatur.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Grandmother had standing under the Grandparent Visitation Statute | Grandmother contends she qualifies under §31-17-5-1(1) or (2) | Guardians argue Grandmother lacks the statutory standing | Grandmother lacked standing; statute is strictly construed; no cure remand. |
| Whether the original 2009 grandparent visitation order was void or voidable | Order should be sustained pending proper proceedings | Order was void due to lack of standing | Order was void ab initio; remand cannot cure. |
| How the statute should be read concerning deceased parent or dissolved marriage | Argues for treating father as deceased or marriage dissolved | Adopts strict statutory interpretation with no deeming of death/dissolution | Statute requires standing only for grandparents who are parents of the deceased parent; not satisfied here. |
| Effect of void vs. voidable judgments on grandparent visitation orders | Voidable could be cured; | Void ab initio if lack of standing | Distinction applied; here order void ab initio, cannot be cured. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Visitation of M.L.B., 983 N.E.2d 583 (Ind. 2013) (historic limits on grandparent visitation and plain statutory construction)
- In re Visitation of C.R.P., 909 N.E.2d 1026 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (standing required under statute; derivate indicates strict construction)
- In re Visitation of J.P.H., 709 N.E.2d 44 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999) (statutory interpretation guidance; legislative intent)
- K.S. v. State, 849 N.E.2d 538 (Ind. 2006) (void vs. voidable; correction through direct appeal when jurisdiction exists)
- Kitchen v. Kitchen, 953 N.E.2d 646 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (Third-party visitation lacking standing; lack cannot be cured)
- M.S. v. C.S., 938 N.E.2d 278 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (void vs. voidable judgments; cure or lack thereof)
- P.E.M., 818 N.E.2d 32 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (voidable vs. void; procedural defect cured if timely)
- M.L.B., 983 N.E.2d 583 (Ind. 2013) (context for grandparent visitation Act)