Kirk R. Jocham v. Melba Sutliff
2015 Ind. App. LEXIS 77
Ind. Ct. App.2015Background
- Kirk and Stephenie Jocham divorced in 2008; they had one child, K.J. (b. 2004).
- Stephenie died in 2011; her husband Emily adopted K.J. in September 2012 (stepparent adoption).
- Stephenie’s mother, Melba Sutliff, filed to intervene and sought grandparent visitation in July 2013—after the adoption was final.
- The trial court initially denied Sutliff’s petition for lack of standing, then granted her motion to correct error, held she was a maternal grandparent, and awarded visitation.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed statutory standing under Indiana’s Grandparent Visitation Act (GVA) and reversed, holding Sutliff lacked standing because she filed after the adoption and had no preexisting court-ordered visitation rights protected by the statute.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Sutliff) | Defendant's Argument (Jocham) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sutliff had statutory standing to seek grandparent visitation after a stepparent adoption | Sutliff is the child’s biological maternal grandmother; GVA §§31-17-5-1 and 31-17-5-9 allow a grandparent to seek visitation where a parent is deceased and visitation rights survive stepparent adoption | After Emily’s adoption, Emily became K.J.’s legal parent; Sutliff was no longer a “grandparent” under the GVA when she filed, so she lacked standing | Reversed: Sutliff had no standing because she filed after the adoption and had no preexisting court-ordered visitation rights protected by §31-17-5-9 |
| Whether §31-17-5-9 preserves the right to file for visitation after a stepparent adoption | Trial court read §31-17-5-9 as preserving the right to seek visitation (i.e., ability to go to court) post-adoption | §31-17-5-9 preserves only visitation rights already established by court order prior to the adoption, not the right to initiate a petition after adoption | Court of Appeals: §31-17-5-9 protects preexisting, court-established visitation rights only; it does not grant post-adoption standing to file a petition |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Visitation of M.L.B., 983 N.E.2d 583 (Ind. 2013) (GVA is exclusive means for grandparent visitation and must be strictly construed)
- In re Visitation of Menzie, 469 N.E.2d 1225 (Ind. Ct. App. 1984) (pre-amendment case on adoption cutting off grandparent rights)
- Bailey v. Menzie, 542 N.E.2d 1015 (Ind. Ct. App. 1989) (legislature’s amendment protecting preexisting grandparent visitation after stepparent adoption)
- Sightes v. Barker, 684 N.E.2d 224 (Ind. Ct. App. 1997) (grandparent who had standing when petition filed retains visitation despite later stepparent adoption)
- In re G.R., 863 N.E.2d 323 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (grandmother lacked standing where parental rights termination preceded filing)
- In re Adoption of B.C.H., 22 N.E.3d 580 (Ind. 2014) (statutory interpretation requires careful parsing of legislature’s words)
- In re Guardianship of A.J.A., 991 N.E.2d 110 (Ind. 2013) (statute in derogation of common law must be strictly construed)