Marquez v. Caudill
376 S.C. 229, 2008 S.C. LEXIS 16, 656 S.E.2d 737 (2008)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
In a child custody dispute between a non-biological parent and a third party, the non-biological parent may be awarded custody if they meet the four-prong test for being a 'psychological parent.' Additionally, a court may order grandparent visitation over a fit parent's objection when compelling circumstances, such as the death of a biological parent, exist to justify such an intrusion on parental rights.
Facts:
- Amy Caudill gave birth to Jason in 1992; his biological father, David Storm, was never involved in his life.
- Amy married the man referred to as Stepfather in 1994, after having moved in with him shortly after Jason's birth.
- Stepfather raised Jason as his own son, and Jason, who has always called him 'Dad,' has never known another father figure.
- Amy and Stepfather had a daughter together, Katie, in December 1999.
- The marriage between Amy and Stepfather was tumultuous, involving three separations.
- In September 2003, during their final separation, Amy committed suicide.
- Following Amy's death, Stepfather moved with Jason and Katie into the home of his girlfriend, Kim, whom he later married.
- Jason's biological maternal grandmother had infrequent and inconsistent contact with him throughout his childhood.
Procedural Posture:
- Following Amy Caudill's death, Jason's maternal grandmother (Grandmother) filed actions in family court seeking custody of Jason and visitation with his half-sister, Katie.
- Jason’s biological father presented an affidavit relinquishing his parental rights.
- The family court, a trial court, awarded custody of Jason to his stepfather (Stepfather) and granted Stepfather's request to adopt Jason.
- The family court also ordered that Grandmother be allowed visitation with both children pursuant to a state statute.
- The family court ordered Grandmother to pay $25,000 of Stepfather's attorney's fees and ordered both parties to equally divide the guardian ad litem fees.
- Both Grandmother and Stepfather appealed the family court's order. The Supreme Court of South Carolina certified the appeals from the Court of Appeals for its own review.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
In a custody dispute between a non-biological stepparent and a biological grandparent, does the stepparent who has acted as the child's only father figure qualify as a 'psychological parent' entitled to custody? Furthermore, does a court order granting grandparent visitation over the objection of a fit, adoptive parent violate that parent's fundamental due process rights when the child's biological mother is deceased?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Moore
Yes, as to the custody question; No, as to the visitation question. A stepparent who acts as a child's only father figure can be deemed a 'psychological parent' and awarded custody over a biological grandparent when it is in the child's best interest. The court formally adopted a four-prong test to establish psychological parent status: (1) the biological parent consented to and fostered the parent-like relationship; (2) the petitioner and child lived together; (3) the petitioner assumed parental obligations without expectation of financial compensation; and (4) the petitioner was in the parental role long enough to establish a bonded, parental relationship. The Stepfather met all four prongs, and awarding him custody was in Jason's best interest, particularly because it kept him with his half-sister. Regarding visitation, a court order compelling grandparent visitation does not violate a fit parent's rights where 'compelling circumstances' exist. The death of a biological parent and the consequent need to maintain ties with the deceased parent's family qualify as compelling circumstances that overcome the presumption that a fit parent's decisions are in the child's best interest.
Dissenting in part - Chief Justice Toal
This opinion concurs with the majority's holdings on custody and visitation but dissents on the award of attorney's fees. The dissent argues that because the case was extremely close and the Grandmother obtained a beneficial result with significant visitation rights, it was an abuse of discretion to require her to pay the Stepfather's attorney's fees. Given the financial burdens on both parties and the mixed outcome, each party should be responsible for their own legal fees, similar to the court's order that they split the guardian ad litem fees.
Analysis:
This case is significant for formally adopting the four-prong 'psychological parent' test in South Carolina, providing a clear legal framework for courts to resolve custody disputes involving non-biological caregivers. It establishes that a functional, parent-like relationship can create rights superior to those of a biological relative who is not a parent, shifting the focus from biology to the child's best interest and established bonds. Furthermore, the decision interprets the 'compelling circumstances' exception to the constitutional protection of parental rights from Troxel v. Granville, holding that a biological parent's death is a sufficient reason to order grandparent visitation over a fit parent's objection to maintain family connections.
