Siufanua v. Fuga
187 Wash. 2d 567
| Wash. | 2017Background
- L.M.S., born 2005, primarily raised by maternal grandparents (petitioners) due to mother’s untreated drug addiction; father Tony Fuga moved to San Diego and had limited contact.
- 2012 King County order established Fuga as legal father, required child support, and gave custody to the mother; Fuga complied with support orders.
- In October 2014 Fuga returned to Washington after the mother’s incarceration and filed to modify custody; grandparents filed a competing nonparental custody petition.
- Grandparents alleged Fuga’s long absence, asserted they were the child’s psychological/parental figures (child calls them “mom”/“dad”), and pointed to a 2005 domestic-violence arrest of Fuga.
- The trial commissioner denied a hearing for lack of “adequate cause”; the trial court affirmed; Court of Appeals affirmed; Supreme Court granted review and affirmed the denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Siufanua/Grandparents) | Defendant's Argument (Fuga) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether petitioners alleged adequate cause to obtain a hearing under RCW 26.10.032(2) | Alleged facts (long-term parental role, child bonded to grandparents, father largely absent) would, if proved, show that placement with father would cause actual detriment | Father is fit, willing, provides support, has positive relationship with child; grandparents’ allegations are insufficiently specific to show actual detriment | Court held trial court did not abuse discretion: grandparents failed to allege specific facts showing parent is unfit or that placement with parent would cause actual detriment; adequate cause not shown |
| Whether psychological/parent-like relationship alone establishes adequate cause | Psychological bond and child’s attachment to grandparents justify hearing because removal would harm child | Bond alone is insufficient absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., child’s special needs or other facts showing likely harm) | Court held parent-like relationship, without more (special needs or extraordinary facts), is insufficient to meet the high adequate-cause threshold |
| Whether prior absence/possible abandonment makes parent currently unfit | Grandparents: father’s long absence and alleged abandonment render him unfit now | Father: maintained some contact/support, complied with orders, returned to seek custody; record does not show present unfitness | Court held alleged past absence/abandonment did not demonstrate current unfitness or show actual detriment; allegations insufficient for adequate cause |
| Standard of review for adequate-cause determinations | N/A (issue framed by parties) | Trial court discretion; appellate review appropriate for abuse of discretion | Court adopts abuse-of-discretion standard for reviewing adequate-cause denials and finds no abuse here |
Key Cases Cited
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (parental liberty interest limits third-party custody interference)
- In re Custody of B.M.H., 179 Wn.2d 224 (2013) (psychological-parent bond alone insufficient for adequate cause absent extraordinary facts)
- In re Custody of E.A.T.W., 168 Wn.2d 335 (2010) (adequate-cause threshold protects parental rights; nonparents must show unfitness or actual detriment)
- In re Custody of Shields, 157 Wn.2d 126 (2006) (actual-detriment standard and caution against ‘‘de facto family’’ labels)
- In re Parentage of Jannot, 149 Wn.2d 123 (2003) (custody determinations afford trial court broad discretion)
- In re Marriage of Allen, 28 Wn. App. 637 (1981) (psychological parent analysis in extreme facts, e.g., child’s unique needs)
- In re Custody of Stell, 56 Wn. App. 356 (1989) (nonparent awarded custody where parent could not meet child’s special needs)