Jenna Gordius v. Randall G. Kelley

2016 ME 77 (2016) · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · May 26, 2016 · No. Han-15-100

Summary

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court reviewed Randall G. Kelley’s appeal from a determination that he was not a de facto parent. The court held that the trial court’s findings were legally inconsistent because it found Kelley had undertaken a permanent, committed parental role and that his exclusion would harm the child, yet treated the circumstances as generically unexceptional. The judgment was vacated and the matter remanded for further proceedings applying the child-focused exceptional-circumstances standard.

Court
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Writing for the Court
Jabar, J.; Saufley, C.J.; Alexander, J.; Mead, J.; Gorman, J.; Humphrey, J.
Jurisdiction
Maine
Decision date
May 26, 2016
Docket number
Han-15-100
Procedural posture
Randall G. Kelley appealed from a District Court judgment determining that he was not a de facto parent of Jenna Gordius's child.
Standard of review
The court reviews the trial court's factual findings with considerable deference, but reviews de novo whether the court correctly articulated and applied the law governing de facto parenthood. Because Kelley bore the burden of proof, he was required to establish the elements by clear and convincing evidence.
Precedential value
Published precedential opinion; the majority opinion establishes and applies a binding standard for evaluating de facto-parent claims under Maine law.
Parties
Randall G. Kelley v. Jenna Gordius
Disposition
vacated

Topics

family law procedureparental rightsappellate procedurestandard of reviewprocedural due process

Practice areas

family lawconstitutional lawappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. What legal standard governs a claim for de facto parenthood under Maine law?
  2. Whether the District Court properly applied the exceptional-circumstances requirement when it found that Kelley's removal would hurt the child but characterized the circumstances as generally unexceptional.

Holdings

  1. A person seeking de facto parent status must prove by clear and convincing evidence both that the person has undertaken a permanent, unequivocal, committed, and responsible parental role in the child's life and that exceptional circumstances exist sufficient to justify interference with the legal or adoptive parents' rights.
  2. Exceptional circumstances must be evaluated with a focus on the individual child. The court must determine by clear and convincing evidence whether the child's life would be substantially and negatively affected if the person who undertook the permanent, unequivocal, committed, and responsible parental role were removed from that role.

Key quotations

In Pitts, we held that a party seeking de facto parent status must prove two elements by clear and convincing evidence: first, that he or she has undertaken a permanent, unequivocal, committed, and responsible parental role in the child’s life; and second, that there are exceptional circumstances sufficient to allow the court to interfere with the legal or adoptive parents’ rights. (¶ 11)
The ultimate question is whether the harm to this child creates the exceptional circumstances that allow the interference with parental rights, i.e., whether the court determines, by clear and convincing evidence, that “the child’s life would be substantially and negatively affected” if Kelley is removed from his “permanent, unequivocal, committed, and responsible parental role. . . .” (¶ 15)

Factual background

Kelley and Gordius were in a romantic relationship for approximately ten years, lived together for several years, married in May 2012, and separated in October 2013. Gordius's child was born in July 2011; Arvide J. Pennartz was the biological father, and a 2013 judgment awarded Gordius and Pennartz shared parental rights and responsibilities, with Gordius having primary residence. Kelley had a close and supportive relationship with the child, and the District Court found that he had undertaken a permanent, unequivocal, committed, and responsible parental role and that excluding him would hurt the child, but concluded that the circumstances were not exceptional.

Procedural history

Gordius and Kelley divorced after a long-term relationship during which Kelley developed a parental relationship with Gordius's child. Kelley sought intervenor status and modification of an existing parental-rights order between Gordius and the child's biological father. The District Court initially granted Kelley preliminary de facto-parent status but later entered a final order concluding that he had not established exceptional circumstances. After denying Kelley's motions for further findings and to alter or amend the judgment, the District Court was reversed on appeal because its findings and legal analysis did not resolve the child-focused exceptional-circumstances inquiry.

Remand instructions

The District Court must conduct further proceedings applying the child-focused exceptional-circumstances standard and determine whether, by clear and convincing evidence, removal of Kelley from his parental role would substantially and negatively affect this child. The trial judge may decide whether to reopen the record for updated information.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…