Bond v. Yount, 15668-3-I
| Decision Date | 16 March 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 15668-3-I,15668-3-I |
| Parties | Robert G. BOND and Pauline G. Bond, husband and wife, Respondents, v. James R. YOUNT and Patricia Ann Yount, husband and wife, Appellants. |
| Court | Washington Court of Appeals |
Eugene M. Moen, Chemnick & Moen, Seattle, for appellants James R. Yount & Patricia Ann Yount.
Howard B. Breskin, Michael P. Ruark, Breskin, Robbins & Merkel, Seattle, for respondents Robert G. Bond & Pauline G. Bond.
The appellants, the adoptive parents (and maternal grandparents) of Bobby, appeal the trial court's grant of visitation rights to Bobby's biological (paternal) grandparents. We agree that the trial court erred in so ruling and reverse the trial court.
Bobby Yount was born on July 16, 1979 to the appellants' adopted daughter and the respondents' son. When Bobby was approximately 1 year of age, his parents separated. Six months later he was taken into the appellants' home. After the natural parents gave their consent, the appellants adopted Bobby.
The respondents have had an ongoing relationship with their grandson since birth. Up until Bobby was 1 1/2 years of age, respondents visited him approximately 2 to 4 times a month. After Bobby went to live with the appellants, the respondents had "reasonable visitation". Visitation averaged once or twice a month in 1982-83. In 1983, the relations between the appellants and respondents became strained, which prompted the appellants to deny the respondents any visitation. Respondents promptly filed suit in superior court requesting visitation. In October of 1984 the trial court found that visitation would be in 5-year-old Bobby's best interest and granted limited and structured visitation. This appeal followed.
The trial court awarded visitation rights to the respondents under RCW 26.09.240 which provides in pertinent part:
The court may order visitation rights for any person when visitation may serve the best interest of the child whether or not there has been any change of circumstances.
Any person may petition the court for visitation rights at any time including, but not limited to, custody proceedings.
Subsequent to the decision of the trial court, the question of whether a grandparent has standing under RCW 26.09.240 was addressed by the Court of Appeals in Mitchell v. John Doe, 41 Wash.App. 846, 706 P.2d 1100 (1985). Mitchell held that grandparents have no standing to petition for visitation with a grandchild who has been adopted by strangers. We...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Adoption of Francisco A., Matter of
... ... if the late review prejudiced Vest's opportunity to adopt the children by allowing them to bond with the Runyons, we do not see how HSD's failure to provide an adequate hearing compelled the ... Nordfelt, 815 P.2d 747 (Utah Ct.App.1991); Bond v. Yount, 47 ... Page 1197 ... [116 N.M. 730] Wash.App. 181, 734 P.2d 39 (1987); In re Adoption of ... ...
-
In re Custody of RRB
...biological family to disturb the sanctity of the adoptive family. Mitchell, 41 Wash.App. at 850,706 P.2d 1100. And in Bond v. Yount, 47 Wash.App. 181, 734 P.2d 39 (1987), the court denied the paternal grandparents visitation with a child adopted by the maternal grandparents and "agree[d] wi......
-
Beckman v. Boggs
...termination of the natural parents' legal rights and the final adoption of the child by the maternal grandparents); Bond v. Yount, 47 Wash.App. 181, 734 P.2d 39 (1987) (Paternal grandparents had no standing to petition for visitation with grandchild who had been previously adopted by the ma......
-
Marriage of Aragon, In re
...712 P.2d 1366 (1986); Leake v. Grissom, 614 P.2d 1107 (Okla.1980); Ex Parte Pepper, 544 S.W.2d 836 (Tex.Civ.App.1976); Bond v. Yount, 47 Wash.App. 181, 734 P.2d 39 (1987). See also Annot., 90 A.L.R.3d 222 (1979); Comment, Visitation After Adoption: In the Best Interests of the Child, 59 N.Y......
-
The Psychological and Emotional Ties That Bind Biological and Adoptive Families: Whether Court-Ordered Postadoption Contact Is in an Adopted Child's Best Interest
...D.C., 4 A.3d 1004, 1017 (N.J. 2010) (protecting the parent’s autonomy in making decisions regarding how to raise a child); Bond v. Yount, 734 P.2d 39, 40 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987) (denying a grandparent’s application because of its potential intrusion on the adoptive family’s sacrosanct privacy......