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 Summary
Summary of the key points and legal principles
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
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