Colorado: Appeals Court Holds Great-grandmother not Entitled to “Grandparent” Visitation (BY: Melissa W.)

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10107526206151929412&q=child+custody&hl=en&as_sdt=4,6&as_ylo=2013 After the district court granted the great-grandmother “grandparent” visitation in the case In re the Parental Responsibilities Concerning M.D.E., 297 P.3d 1059 (Colo. 2013) the appeals court vacated their ruling. In May of 2009 the child’s mother filed a petition for allocation of parental rights to the child. After several months the court entered permanent order and parenting plan between the mother and father. Six months later the great-grandmother filed a motion to intervene in the proceeding along with a motion for “grandparent” visitation. The great-grandmother sought these motions asserting that because grandparents can seek visitation under statute by “logical extension” the great-grandparents should also be able to seek visitation. The father opposed the intervention arguing that because she is the great-grandmother and not the “grandparent” she lacks standing to proceed. The court granted to great-grandmother’s motion to intervene, while reserving ruling on the motion for visitation. The father appealed the order and the district court upheld the magistrate’s ruling. The father then appealed the district court’s order. On appeal the court looked at whether the great-grandparent was a “grandparent” within the meaning of section 19-1-117. Under section 19-17-17 a grandparent is defined as “a person who is the parent of a child’s father or mother.” When examining this definition the Colorado Court of Appeals concluded that a great-grandmother is not a grandparent within the meaning of section 19-1-17, and therefore does not have standing to seek visitation rights. Because the great-grandparent does not have standing to seek visitation under the statute the court of appeals reversed the district court’s order.