Estate of Casteel v. Guardian Ad Litem

• Decision Date: 16 May 2000
• Citation: 17 S.W.3d 585
• Parties: (Mo.App. W.D. 2000) Estate of Kayla Marie Casteel, Minor, Plaintiff, Betsy G. Casteel, Appellant, v. Guardian Ad Litem, Respondent. WD57185 0
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

17 S.W.3d 585 (Mo.App. W.D. 2000) Estate of Kayla Marie Casteel, Minor, Plaintiff, Betsy G. Casteel, Appellant, v. Guardian Ad Litem, Respondent.

WD57185

Missouri Court of Appeals Western District

05/16/2000

Appeal From: Circuit Court of Boone County, Hon. Ellen Roper

Counsel for Appellant: William P. Cronan

Counsel for Respondent: Mick D. Wilson

Opinion Summary: The mother was granted letters of guardianship over her minor child, which are to terminate upon the child's eighteenth birthday. The mother appealed, claiming the trial court erred in refusing to issue letters of guardianship that would continue beyond the child's eighteenth birthday.

Court holds: The trial court lacked jurisdiction to grant the letters of guardianship, rendering those letters void ab initio.

Harold L. Lowenstein, Presiding Judge

The issue raised in this appeal is whether letters of guardianship to a parent for her minor child, must terminate when the child turns eighteen. Though not raised, there is a more fundamental question of jurisdiction in the trial court to grant a parent letters of guardianship of a minor child. Appellant mother applied for guardianship over her minor daughter. The trial court granted letters of guardianship of a minor but held the guardianship would terminate upon the minor's eighteenth birthday. Mother filed this appeal because the court failed to extend the guardianship past the child's eighteenth birthday. The dispositive question here, however, is whether there is statutory authority for Appellant to receive letters of guardianship of a minor for her child.

FACTS

Kayla Marie Casteel, born June 15, 1982, is the adopted daughter of Appellant Betsy G. Casteel and Don Casteel, who is not a party to this suit. Kayla suffers from reactive attachment disorder and bi-polar disorder. In the words of her psychiatrist, "Kayla has been having significant mood swings, unpredictable behavior, constant defiance, disobedience, and lack of accepting personal responsibility...She will not take personal responsibility for taking her medication...She requires consistent supervision by an adult caretaker."

On March 17, 1999, Kayla's mother, Appellant Betsy Casteel, filed a "Petition for Appointment of Guardian and/or Conservator" in the trial court. Appellant requested to be appointed guardian/conservator for Kayla due to Kayla's "mental illness." Appellant reasoned that, "[Kayla] is unable to manage her finances or herself, and needs a guardian/conservator to look out for her interest." Appellant asked the court to find Kayla was incapacitated and/or disabled. Additionally, Appellant filed a like petition for Kayla's brother David, born April 16, 1981, and later adopted by Appellant. In a letter from the deputy clerk, the court refused to accept Appellant's petitions. The letter detailed that since both children were under 18 years of age, petitions specifically designated for minors needed to be filed. Consequently, Appellant re-filed "Petition for Appointment of Guardian and/or Conservator of Minor" for both the children. The allegations contained therein were nearly identical to those alleged in the initial petitions. However, the minor petitions did not provide for a finding of incapacity or disability.

The minors were appointed a guardian ad litem and the matter was set for hearing on April 12, 1999. At the hearing, the court expressed that in dealings with a minor, the court will only appoint a guardian on the basis that the individual is in fact a minor. The court would not consider appointing a guardian to a minor on the basis of incapacity or disability. The court stated, "as far as adjudicating based on mental disease or illness or any other matter of that, for children, we don't." The court stated that it would appoint guardians for the two minors but that the guardianships would terminate upon each minor's eighteenth birthday, when each reached the age of emancipation. Since David was nearly eighteen, and in order to avoid a short guardianship period prior to termination, the court continued his guardianship proceeding until his eighteenth birthday. As to Kayla, the court granted Appellant guardianship letters that are to terminate upon Kayla's eighteenth birthday, June 18, 2000. Additionally, as there was no evidence of property owned or income received by the minor, the court denied Appellant's conservator appointment request.

ANALYSIS

Appellant's single point relied on is that the trial court erred in refusing to issue letters of guardianship for a minor child that would continue beyond that minor's eighteenth birthday. Appellant claims that Missouri's statutory scheme permits the court to find a minor disabled and/or incapacitated and to issue letters of guardianship upon that basis which would not terminate upon the minor's majority birthday. Specifically, Appellant wrote:

The Court erred in declining to accept jurisdiction to order a guardianship for a disabled minor that would continue beyond the age of majority because the statutes permit such an order and the evidence presented clearly shows the Appellant is entitled to such an order.

As detailed above, Appellant originally filed with the court, petitions for letters of guardianship based upon disability or incapacity. However, the clerk of court requested Appellant change the petitions to those designated for guardianship of a minor, and Appellant complied without objection. There is nothing in the record to indicate that the clerk was acting by order of the court. At the hearing, the following exchange took place between the judge and Appellant's counsel:

The Court: ...if an...