In re L.L.-1, L.L.-2, and L.L.-3

Summary

The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of a grandmother's request for placement of three children in an abuse and neglect proceeding. The court held that the Department of Health and Human Resources had considered the grandmother as required by the grandparent-placement statute, but that the circuit court properly determined placement was not in the children's best interests based on the record. The court also found no error in relying on existing evidence concerning the grandmother's awareness of the conditions in the home, despite the guardian ad litem's failure to interview her.

Holdings

1. The circuit court did not fail to consider the grandmother for placement. The statute requires the DHHR to consider known grandparents and conduct a home study, but it does not require the circuit court to adopt the DHHR's recommendation.
2. The statutory preference for grandparent placement does not require permanent placement with a grandparent when the record shows that such placement is not in the children's best interests.
3. Under the limited facts of this case, the guardian ad litem's failure to interview the grandmother did not require reversal because the existing record supplied sufficient evidence concerning the grandmother's suitability and awareness of the neglectful conditions.
4. The court would not address the grandmother's assignments concerning denial of intervention and imputation of the father's conduct because the brief failed to comply with the requirement to provide developed legal argument and appropriate authority and record citations.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the circuit court failed to consider the grandmother for placement under West Virginia Code § 49-4-114(a)(3).
2. Whether the circuit court erred in denying the grandmother permanent placement despite her passing a home study and being certified to foster children.
3. Whether the guardian ad litem was required to interview the grandmother before recommending against placement.
4. Whether the grandmother's inadequately supported assignments of error concerning intervention and imputation of the father's conduct were preserved for appellate review.

Disposition

affirmed