S.L. & M.L. v. D.L. ( 2018 )


Menu:
  • J-A17024-18
    NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
    S.L. & M.L.                                :   IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
    :        PENNSYLVANIA
    Appellants            :
    :
    :
    v.                          :
    :
    :
    D.L.                                       :   No. 289 WDA 2018
    Appeal from the Order January 30, 2018
    In the Court of Common Pleas of Mercer County Civil Division at No(s):
    2017-1280
    BEFORE: OTT, J., KUNSELMAN, J., and MUSMANNO, J.
    JUDGEMENT ORDER BY KUNSELMAN, J.:                        FILED JULY 25, 2018
    Appellants, S.L. & M.L., initially appealed the trial court's dismissal of
    their petition to involuntarily terminate the parental rights of the Appellee,
    D.L., (birth mother) on the basis that Appellants lacked in loco parentis
    standing to file such a petition. Without reaching the merits, a previous panel
    of this Court remanded with instruction for the trial court to appoint the child
    both a guardian ad litem and legal counsel pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2313(a).
    See In re J.R.L., 1630 WDA 2017 (Pa. Super. May 25, 2018) (unpublished
    memorandum).
    Before we issued that decision, however, Appellants filed a second
    termination petition.     The trial court similarly denied this petition, and
    Appellants appealed. See 287 WDA 2018; J-A17023-18. Meanwhile, Appellee
    sought to vacate the Appellants' sole custody award, which Appellants
    obtained on an emergency, interim basis and without an evidentiary hearing.
    J-A17024-18
    The trial court granted Appellee’s request, relying on its previous finding that
    the Appellants did not stand in loco parentis for termination purposes. The
    Appellants appealed the vacation of the interim custody award as well.
    We listed these cases for consecutive arguments.            At argument,
    Appellee’s counsel    acknowledged that Appellants’ are entitled to an
    evidentiary hearing on standing pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 5324(2)
    (“Standing for any form of physical custody or legal custody”).
    We also remand this case for the trial court to conduct an evidentiary
    hearing to determine whether Appellants stand in loco parentis under 23
    Pa.C.S.A. § 5324(2) to seek a form of custody. The trial court shall apply the
    appropriate standard for determining standing under this custody statute. At
    argument, counsel informed this Court that the trial court had made the
    appropriate appointments for the child in accordance with the previous panel’s
    decision.   The child's guardian ad litem and legal counsel shall enter their
    appearances and participate in this hearing as well.
    Case remanded with instructions. Jurisdiction relinquished.
    Judgment Entered.
    Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
    Prothonotary
    Date: 7/25/2018
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 289 WDA 2018

Filed Date: 7/25/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 7/25/2018