Summary
The Nebraska Supreme Court held that James Gould had a statutory right to intervene in a child custody proceeding based on his pleaded claim of in loco parentis status. The court explained that intervention must initially be decided from the pleadings, assuming the intervenor’s factual allegations are true, and that factual disputes should be resolved at a later evidentiary stage. The court reversed the denial of intervention and remanded with directions to allow it.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court erred by deciding James Gould's right to intervene based on factual findings and materials outside the complaint in intervention rather than assuming the complaint's factual allegations were true.
- Whether James Gould's complaint sufficiently alleged a direct and legal interest in the custody litigation based on an asserted in loco parentis relationship.
- Whether the temporary custody order placing the child with Gabriel Gould extinguished James Gould's alleged in loco parentis status before the intervention determination.
Holdings
- In determining a motion or objection to intervention, the court must initially evaluate the complaint in intervention by assuming that its factual allegations are true. Factual disputes concerning those allegations must be resolved later at an appropriate evidentiary hearing, such as on summary judgment or at trial.
- James Gould had a statutory right to intervene because his complaint alleged a direct and legal interest in the custody litigation arising from an asserted in loco parentis relationship and alleged facts showing that he had assumed all obligations incident to the parental relationship.
- The temporary custody order placing the child with Gabriel Gould did not, at the intervention stage, establish that James Gould's alleged in loco parentis status had been extinguished.
Key quotations
“The intervention statutes are to be liberally construed.” (308 Neb. 23)
“The right to intervene pursuant to statute is absolute.” (308 Neb. 23)
“An indirect, remote, or conjectural interest in the result of a suit is not enough to establish intervention as a matter of right.” (308 Neb. 23-24)
“Thus, for a court as a preliminary matter to permit intervention as a matter of right, the intervenor must plead some interest in the subject matter of the litigation to give him or her standing in court, describing the ultimate facts evidencing the intervenor’s interest in the matter of litigation; otherwise, the intervenor is a mere interloper and wholly incompetent to challenge the contentions of the opposing parties.” (308 Neb. 23-24)
“We have never held that in loco parentis status can be involuntarily extinguished from one day to the next, let alone from one hour to the next.” (308 Neb. 26)
Factual background
The custody proceeding concerned S.G., a child born in 2016 to Arleene Carroll and Gabriel Gould. James Gould alleged that S.G. had lived in his home since birth and that he had provided her care, paid her expenses, fed and clothed her, and assumed all obligations of a parent. Gabriel obtained temporary custody on January 31, 2020, and James filed his complaint to intervene the same day. The district court relied on the temporary custody order, a prior child support order, affidavits, and other filings to deny intervention, but the Supreme Court held that the intervention question had to be decided from the pleadings and assumed their factual allegations to be true.
Procedural history
Arleene Carroll filed an action against Gabriel Gould concerning custody and parenting time for their child. James Gould, the child's paternal grandfather, filed a complaint to intervene and sought custody, alleging that the child had lived with him since birth and that he had assumed the obligations of a parent. The district court denied intervention after considering affidavits, prior orders, and other filings, concluding that any in loco parentis status had been extinguished. The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed and remanded with directions to allow the intervention.
Remand instructions
The district court was directed to allow James Gould's intervention and recognize him as a party to the litigation. If the allegations of the complaint are later found to be untrue, the court must tax costs against James pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-329.