L. M. W. v. L. A. W.

California Court of Appeal Oct 19, 1982 No. Civ. No. 64284Published

Before: Ashby

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the trial court's order terminating the guardianship was supported by substantial evidence and that the mandatory mediation requirements of Civil Code section 4607 do not apply to guardianship termination proceedings between parents and nonparents.

Issues

Whether substantial evidence supports the trial court's order terminating the guardianship.
Whether Civil Code section 4607 requires mandatory mediation in a proceeding to terminate a guardianship held by nonparents.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The credibility of the witnesses and the conflict in the evidence was solely for the trial court to resolve, and the trial court believed the evidence favoring parents.”

“The instant case does not involve a controversy between the parents over custody of the child.”

“Whether or not voluntary mediation might have been helpful to resolution of the conflict between parents and grandparents, it was not required by Civil Code section 4607.”

Opinion

ASHBY, J. The paternal grandparents appeal from an order terminating their guardianship over the minor child and restoring custody of the child to the natural parents.

[710]The minor, M. S. W. (hereinafter the child), was born to respondents (hereinafter parents) L. M. W. (hereinafter father) and C. L. W. (hereinafter mother) on December 22, 1977. After the birth of the child, parents, who had been living together unmarried, were financially unable to take care of the child. They took the child to the home of father’s parents (hereinafter grandparents), appellants L. A. W. (hereinafter grandfather) and E. S. W. (hereinafter grandmother). The child had a respiratory illness and needed careful watching, which grandmother provided.

Tl]e parties then agreed that grandparents should be appointed as guardians for the child so they would have authority to secure medical care, to make the child a dependent on grandfather’s medical insurance, and to make the child a dependent of grandparents for tax purposes since grandparents were providing the child’s support. With the consent of parents, grandparents were appointed as guardians on May 10, 1978.

On March 2, 1981, when the child was three and a half years old, parents petitioned the court to terminate the guardianship (Prob. Code, § 1601), alleging that circumstances had changed and that they could now properly care for the child, and requesting that custody be returned to them.

At a hearing on the petition held April 6, 1981, parents and a social worker testified in support of the petition; grandparents and two brothers of father testified against. After submission the trial court ordered that the guardianship be terminated and made its findings of fact and conclusions of law, including, “At the time of said named minor’s birth, the natural parents, Petitioners, were unmarried and financially unable to care for said named minor and the guardianship was established, [f] The Petitioners are presently married, the natural father is currently employed, the natural mother has been employed and is currently seeking fiuther employment, and the Petitioners currently have the facilities and resources for the proper care and support of the minor child, [f] Petitioners are fit and proper persons to have custody of said minor child, [f] It is no longer necessary that the minor have a guardian. [|] It is in the minor’s best interest to terminate the guardianship. [1] To continue the guardianship would be detrimental to the minor’s interest and her relationship with her natural parents.”1

L. M. W. v. L. A. W.

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief