Care & Protection of Torrence

454 Mass. 1010 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · June 18, 2009

Summary

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court dismissed as moot the parents’ appeal from denial of relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3, concerning a temporary transfer of custody to the Department of Children and Families. The care and protection case had been dismissed without prejudice, custody had been returned to the parents, and no continuing personal stake or sufficient public-interest exception justified reaching the merits.

Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction
Massachusetts
Decision date
June 18, 2009
Procedural posture
The parents appealed from a single justice's denial of their petition for relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3, challenging a temporary order transferring custody of their children to the Department of Children and Families. After the appeal was permitted to proceed, the Juvenile Court dismissed the care and protection case without prejudice, vacated the custody order, and returned custody to the parents. The Department moved to dismiss the appeal as moot.
Precedential value
published
Parties
The parents of the three minor children v. Department of Children and Families
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

family law procedurechild custodymootnesswrit of certiorariappellate procedure

Practice areas

child welfareappellate procedureextraordinary relief

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the parents' appeal from the denial of extraordinary relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3, was moot after the underlying care and protection case was dismissed and custody was returned.
  2. Whether the court should nevertheless reach the merits because the appeal involved an issue of systemic importance or public interest.
  3. Whether the parents could properly seek review of the custody order while violating that order.

Holdings

  1. The appeal was moot because the underlying case had been dismissed, the custody order had been vacated, custody had been returned to the parents, and the parents no longer had a personal stake in the appeal.
  2. The court would not reach the merits because the parents identified no legal issue of systemic importance or public interest warranting review despite mootness.
  3. The parents' attempt to obtain review under G. L. c. 211, § 3, while they were violating the custody order was improper.

Key quotations

The parents thus no longer have a personal stake in the resolution of this appeal (454 Mass. 1010)
The parents’ attempt to obtain review pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3, of the custody order while in violation of it was improper. (454 Mass. 1010)
The parents have not identified any legal issue of systemic importance or public interest to justify reaching the merits of the case. (454 Mass. 1010)

Factual background

The parents of three children failed to produce the children for a sexual abuse intervention network interview and later defied a court order requiring production for identification. The mother took the children out of Massachusetts and later out of the country, after which the Juvenile Court temporarily transferred custody to the Department of Children and Families. The care and protection case was later dismissed without prejudice, the custody order was vacated, and custody was returned to the parents; the allegations of abuse and neglect were never adjudicated.

Procedural history

A Juvenile Court judge temporarily transferred custody of the children to the Department after the parents failed to produce them for an interview and identification pursuant to court orders. The parents sought extraordinary relief in the county court under G. L. c. 211, § 3, but a single justice denied relief. While the parents' appeal was pending, the Juvenile Court dismissed the underlying case without prejudice and returned custody, eliminating the parents' personal stake in the appeal.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…