In Re the Interest of O.C. a Child, and Concerning C.M., 2012COA161 (September 27, 2012)

What voices should be at the table when deciding who should take care of a child who has been removed from the care of his parents? In this case, the child was removed from the care of the mother. The child stayed with a friend until moved to a foster home. Grandparents sought to intervene to request that the child be placed with them. The County and the Guardian Ad Litem opposed the grandparents’ request. The trial court agreed with the County because the grandparents did not have the child in their care for three months, as it believed was required under C.R.S. 19-3-507. The court of appeals first determined that it could decide the appeal by deeming the denial of the motion to intervene as a final order. The court then held that the statutory requirement of three months of care before gaining a right to intervene only applied to foster parents, but not grandparents or other relatives.

http://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Court_Of_Appeals/Opinion/2012/12CA0649-PD.pdf

http://www.cobar.org/opinions/opinion.cfm?opinionid=8678&courtid=1

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under Appellate Review Challenged, Family Law

One response to “In Re the Interest of O.C. a Child, and Concerning C.M., 2012COA161 (September 27, 2012)

  1. Pingback: A.M. by and through his Guardian ad Litem, and L.H. and R.H. v. A.C., and the People in the Interests of A.M. v. N.M. | Colorado Litigation Report

Brief this Case

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s