Title: South Dakota Supreme Court holds that a father can choose when to allow his twin children visitation with their maternal grandparents. BY: Sarah W.

Beach & Beach v. Coisman, No. 26129, 2012 S.D. Sup. Ct., LEXIS 31 (7^th Cir. May 2, 2012)

Links for opinion:

http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy.msbcollege.edu/lnacui2api/api/version1/getDocCui?lni=55JF-WGX1-F04K-300R&csi=144753&hl=t&hv=t&hnsd=f&hns=t&hgn=t&oc=00240&perma=true

http://www.sdjudicial.com/Uploads/opinions/26129.pdf

The South Dakota Supreme Court upheld the decision in Beach & Beach v. Coisman, No. 26129, 2012 S.D. Sup. Ct., LEXIS 31 (7^th Cir. May 2, 2012) by the 7^th Judicial Circuit to grant a motion for a judgment as a matter of law submitted by the Defendant/Appellee  that denied the maternal grandparents court ordered visitation under SDCL 25-5-29.

The defendant was married to the plaintiff’s daughter and had twin children from this union. The maternal grandparents assisted with taking care of the twin children during their infancy. Three years after the birth of the twins, the mother died. The defendant continued to allow visitation with the children’s maternal grandparents until December 2009 when Plaintiff’s kept the children for ten (10) days longer than had been arranged. Following this visitation, defendant expressed his concern that the children were not being properly supervised and his concern that the children were being exposed to heavy equipment and recreational vehicles. Defendant communicated that the children would not be allowed to visit the grandparents at their home, and encouraged the grandparents to visit the grandchildren at the Defendant’s home instead.

Between March 2010 and September 2010 no visitation between the twin children and the maternal grandparents took place. In August of 2010 the Plaintiff’s filed a petition for visitation with the South Dakota courts requesting that they have the children at their home for one weekend per month during the children’s school year, one week during Christmas break, and four consecutive weeks during the summer. Defendant did not accept this visitation plan, but did allow for visitation at the children’s home during the court proceedings.

In response to the petition for visitation submitted by the Plaintiffs, Defendant submitted a motion for a directed verdict which was granted.  The Plaintiff’s appealed this decision to the South Dakota Supreme Court. The Supreme Court of South Dakota affirmed the decision.

The South Dakota courts applied S.D. Codified Laws §§ 25-5-30 and 25-5-29(4) in reaching their decision. Under these statutes when the parent has been deemed fit to care for their child, there must be evidence of circumstances which would suggest serious detriment to a child in order to grant visitation to a non-parent. No such evidence was presented in this case.

Labels for the post: visitation, twins, extraordinary circumstances, grandparent, custody, detriment, ranch, matter of law, best interests, parental rights, time spent, grandchild, nonparent, conclusions of law, custody and control, parental unfitness, parental, bonded, lived, substantial relationship, right to custody, child’s parent, primary caretaker, grandchildren