Thе issue in this appeal is whether the male friend of a child’s natural mother has standing to appeal from an adjudication of dеpendency and an award of the child’s custody to the natural father. After careful review, we conclude that the boyfriend lаcks standing to appeal.
*282 Russell Garthwaite, almost four (4) years of age at the time of the hearing, is the son of Cynthia and Rian Garthwaite. After Cynthia and Rian separated, Russell lived with his mother. Cynthia then began dating Enrico Ingrosso, who thereafter spent much of his time with Cynthia in hеr home. On January 6, 1991, Children and Youth Services of Chester County (CYS) learned that Russell had been taken to the emergency room of the Chеster County Hospital. An examination revealed that Russell had suffered a fractured skull, twelve (12) rib fractures, internal bleeding and a pеlvic injury. Also observed were a second degree burn of the right hand and multiple bruises of the torso and extremities. CYS sought and was awardеd temporary custody of Russell. After a subsequent hearing, the trial court made a finding of dependency because of the abuse which Russell had sustained and awarded custody of Russell to his father. From this order Ingrosso appealed. Significantly, Cynthia Garthwaite did not join the appeal.
The basis for Ingrosso’s appeal is a finding by the trial court that “Cynthia Garthwaite and Enrico Ingrosso are the рerpetrators of the physical abuse.... ” In its subsequent opinion, however, the court conceded that it had been unable to determine whether Ingrosso had personally inflicted physical abuse on Russell but had determined that Ingrosso and Cynthia, to whom Russell’s cаre had been entrusted, were responsible for the boy’s injuries. 1
A party seeking judicial resolution of a controversy must, as a prеrequisite, establish that he has standing, or a stake, in maintaining the action. See:
Nye v. Erie Ins. Exch.,
The question of standing is rooted in the notion that for a party to maintain a challenge to an official order оr action, he must be aggrieved in that his rights have been invaded or infringed. This principle was thoroughly considered in Wm. Penn Parking Garage v. City of Pittsburgh,464 Pa. 168 ,346 A.2d 269 (1975) where this court confirmеd that to have standing, a party must (a) have a substantial interest in the subject-matter of the litigation; (b) the interest must be direct; and (c) the interest must be immediate and not a remote consequence.
A “substantial” interest is an interest in the outcome of the litigation which surрasses the common interest of all citizens in procuring obedience to the law. Wm. Penn Parking Garage, Inc., supra, 464 at 192,346 A.2d at 282 . A “direct” interest requires a showing that the matter complained of caused harm to the party’s interest. Upper Bucks County Vocational-Technical School Education Ass’n v. Upper Bucks County Vocational Technical School Joint Comm.,504 Pa. 418 , 422,474 A.2d 1120 , 1122 (1984). An “immediate” interest involves the nature of the causal connection between the action complained of and the injury to the party challenging it, Wm. Penn Parking Garage, Inc., supra,464 Pa. at 197 ,346 A.2d at 283 , and is shown where the interest the party seeks to protect is within the zone of interests sought to be protected by the statute or constitutional guaranteе in question. Upper Bucks County Vocational-Technical School Education Ass’n, supra,504 Pa. at 423 ,474 A.2d at 1122 .
South Whitehall Township Police Serv. v. South Whitеhall Township,
The Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 6301 et seq., focuses on the well-being of children. Dependency proceedings concern themselves with the correction of situations in which children are lacking proper parental care or control. See: 42
*284
Pa.C.S. § 6302. In general, the responsibility for such care is vested in parents, guardians аnd custodians.
2
When proper care and control is lacking, a child may be removed from a parent, guardian or custodian. This constitutes a serious intrusion into the relationship between the child and the parent, guardian or custodian. See:
In re Black,
In the instant case, Ingrosso has no special status with respect to his girlfriend’s son. He is not a parent, guardian or custodian to Russell, and, therefore, he has no interest in Russell’s custody which entitles him to appeal from the trial court’s award thereof. Any effect which the trial court’s order may have upon Ingrosso is collateral and remote. Because he was not a party to the dependency proceeding and because his interest in the court’s determination thereof is remote and not immеdiate, Ingrosso can have no standing to appeal from the court’s adjudication of Russell as a dependent child. See:
South Whitehall Township Police Serv. v. South Whitehall Township, supra
at 86-87,
As Ingrosso was not a party to the dependency proсeedings and because his interests were not represented therein, the court’s adjudication bears no collateral consequences for him. See:
Banker v. Valley Forge Ins. Co.,
Appeal dismissed.
Notes
. A report filed by CYS implicating Ingrosso in Russell’s abuse has been given "indicated” status, which means that while CYS has determined that evidence of abuse by Ingrosso exists, no formal adjudication thereof has been made. See: 23 Pа.C.S. § 6303; 55 Pa.Code § 3490.4.
. The Juvenile Act defines ''custodian” thusly:
“Custodian.” A person other than a parent or legal guardian, who stands in loco parentis to the child, or a person to whom legal custody of the child has been given by order of a court.
42 Pa.C.S. § 6302.