In re A.F.
Court
West Virginia Supreme Court
Decided
June 6, 2025
Jurisdiction
S
Practice Areas
Case Summary
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA January 2025 Term _____________________ FILED June 6, 2025 No. 23‑698 released at 3:00 p.m. C. CASEY FORBES, CLERK _____________________ SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA IN RE A.F. ___________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Circuit Court of Wood County The Honorable Robert A. Waters, Judge Civil Action No. 21‑JA‑150 VACATED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS _________________________________________________________ Submitted: April 22, 2025 Filed: June 6, 2025 Joseph Munoz, Esq. John B. McCuskey, Esq. Parkersburg, West Virginia Attorney General Counsel for the Petitioners, Kristen E. Ross, Esq. Intervenor Grandparents, P.F. and R.F. Assistant Attorney General Charleston, West Virginia Counsel for the Respondent, Department of Human Services Keith White, Esq. St. Mary’s, West Virginia Guardian Ad Litem for A.F. Michael Farnsworth, Esq. Parkersburg, West Virginia Counsel for the Intervenor Foster Parents, K.B. and M.B. CHIEF JUSTICE WOOTON delivered the Opinion of the Court. JUSTICE TRUMP concurs and reserves the right to file a separate opinion. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. “This Court reviews the circuit court's final order and ultimate disposition under an abuse of discretion standard. We review challenges to findings of fact under a clearly erroneous standard; conclusions of law are reviewed de novo.” Syl. Pt. 4, Burgess v. Porterfield, 196 W. Va. 178, 469 S.E.2d 114 (1996). 2. “Questions relating to . . . custody of the children are within the sound discretion of the court and its action with respect to such matters will not be disturbed on appeal unless it clearly appears that such discretion has been abused.” Syl., in part, Nichols v. Nichols, 160 W. Va. 514, 236 S.E.2d 36 (1977). 3. “In visitation as well as custody matters, we have traditionally held paramount the best interests of the child.” Syl. Pt. 5, Carter v. Carter, 196 W. Va. 239, 470 S.E.2d 193 (1996). 4. “West Virginia Code § [49‑4‑114(a)(3) (2024)] provides for grandparent preference in determining adoptive placement for a child where parental rights have been terminated and also incorporates a best interests analysis within that determination by including the requirement that the [DHS] find that the grandparents would be suitable adoptive parents prior to granting custody to the grandparents. The statute contemplates that placement with grandparents is presumptively in the best interests i of the child, and the preference for grandparent placement may be overcome only where the record reviewed in its entirety establishes that such placement is not in the best interests of the child.” Syl. Pt. 4, Napoleon S. v. Walker, 217 W. Va. 254, 617 S.E.2d 801 (2005). 5. In denying grandparent placement the circuit court must make detailed findings of fact and conclusions of law demonstrating that it considered the grandparent preference in West Virginia Code § 49-4-114(a)(3) (2024) and determined, based on the record in its entirety, that the preference was overcome by the best interests of the child. ii WOOTON, Chief Justice: Petitioners P.F. and R.F. 1 (“petitioners”) appeal the November 8, 2023, order of the Circuit Court of Wood County denying their motions for visitation and custody with respect to their grandchild A.F., who is the subject of this abuse and neglect proceeding. On appeal, petitioners assert that the circuit court erred by failing to properly apply the grandparent preference expressed in West Virginia Code § 49-4-114(a)(3) (2024) and by denying visitation and placem
Case Details
Case Details
Legal case information
Status
Decided
Date Decided
June 6, 2025
Jurisdiction
S
Court Type
federal
Legal Significance
Case importance metrics
Metadata
Additional information
Quick Actions
Case management tools
Case Summary
AI-generated comprehensive summary with legal analysis
Case Overview
In re A.F. is a significant case decided by the West Virginia Supreme Court on June 6, 2025, focusing on the rights of grandparents in custody and visitation proceedings following the termination of parental rights due to abuse and neglect. The court's ruling underscores the importance of adhering to statutory preferences regarding grandparent custody.
Legal Issues
The case addresses several critical legal questions:
- Application of grandparent preference in custody and visitation decisions.
- Petitioners' entitlement to visitation or custody of A.F.
- Relevance of the grandparent visitation statute post-termination of parental rights.
- Failure to apply grandparent preference in the circuit court's decision.
Factual Background
- The petitioners, grandparents of A.F., sought custody and visitation rights after the termination of A.F.'s mother's parental rights due to abuse and neglect.
- Despite the Department of Health and Human Services (DHS) approving their home study, the circuit court denied their motions for visitation and custody.
- A.F. had been living with her foster parents for approximately three years, which the court cited as a factor in its decision.
- Concerns regarding the petitioners' past maltreatment substantiations influenced the circuit court's ruling.
Court's Analysis
The West Virginia Supreme Court found that:
- The circuit court failed to adequately consider the grandparent preference as mandated by West Virginia Code § 49-4-114(a)(3).
- The court emphasized the best interests of the child standard, which governs custody matters.
- The circuit court's order lacked sufficient findings to demonstrate proper consideration of the grandparent preference, leading to a remand for further proceedings.
The court also noted that the petitioners' successful completion of a home study raised questions about the circuit court's adherence to statutory preferences.
Holdings and Decision
The court made the following key rulings:
- The circuit court's order was vacated and remanded due to failure to apply the grandparent preference, emphasizing the need for detailed findings in custody decisions.
- The court denied the petitioners' motions for visitation and custody based on the child's established bond with her foster family, prioritizing A.F.'s best interests.
Legal Precedents
The court referenced several important precedents, including:
- Burgess v. Porterfield, 196 W. Va. 178, 469 S.E.2d 114 (1996): Established the standard of review for circuit court's final orders.
- Napoleon S. v. Walker, 217 W. Va. 254, 617 S.E.2d 801 (2005): Addressed grandparent preference in custody determinations.
- In re P.F., 243 W. Va. 569, 848 S.E.2d 826 (2020): Highlighted the necessity for courts to provide clear reasoning when overcoming the grandparent preference.
Practical Implications
This ruling has significant implications for:
- Family Law practitioners, particularly those involved in child custody and abuse and neglect cases.
- Establishing the importance of adhering to statutory guidelines regarding grandparent preferences in custody decisions.
- Future cases involving grandparent rights, reinforcing the need for courts to provide detailed findings when denying such rights.
Overall, In re A.F. serves as a crucial reminder of the legal standards governing grandparent custody rights in West Virginia, emphasizing the need for courts to prioritize the best interests of the child while adhering to statutory mandates.
Legal Topics
Areas of law covered in this case
Case Information
Detailed case metadata and classifications
Court Proceedings
Document Details
Legal Classification
Similar Cases
Cases with similar legal principles and precedents
Case Details
Legal case information
Status
Decided
Date Decided
June 6, 2025
Jurisdiction
S
Court Type
federal
Legal Significance
Case importance metrics
Metadata
Additional information
Quick Actions
Case management tools