Sketo v. Brown, 89-2116

Decision Date09 April 1990
Docket NumberNo. 89-2116,89-2116
Parties15 Fla. L. Weekly D906 Anna SKETO, Appellant, v. Patricia S. BROWN, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Lynn Alan Thompson and Linda A. Bailey, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Laura Beth Faragasso of Henry, Buchanan, Mick & English, P.A., Tallahassee, for appellee.

ZEHMER, Judge.

Anna Sketo appeals an amended final order granting Patricia Brown grandparental visitation rights with Mrs. Sketo's two children pursuant to section 752.01, Florida Statutes (1987). She argues that the statute is unconstitutional, both facially and as applied, because it violates her right to privacy protected by the state and federal constitutions. Mrs. Sketo further argues that, even if section 752.01 is constitutional, the order must be reversed because the evidence is insufficient to support the trial court's finding that the visitation ordered would be in the minor children's best interest. We conclude that the statute is not facially unconstitutional, but reverse the order as an abuse of discretion upon the finding that it is too extensive and unreasonable under the statute. For this reason, we find it unnecessary to decide whether the statute is unconstitutional as applied. See Singletary v. State, 322 So.2d 551 (Fla.1975) ("settled principle of constitutional law that courts should not pass upon the constitutionality of statutes if the case in which the question arises may be effectively disposed of on other grounds").

Section 752.01 authorizes the court to "award reasonable rights of visitation to the grandparent with respect to the child when it is in the best interest of the minor child" if, among other things, "[o]ne or both parents of the child are deceased." Appellant contends that the fourteenth amendment of the United States Constitution and the right of privacy amendment in Article I, section 23 of the Florida Constitution accord to her a right of privacy to raise her children "as she sees fit" free of interference from the state. Continuing, she argues that this right cannot be circumscribed by the state in the absence of a compelling state interest, and even then this compelling state interest must be exercised by the least restrictive means. She contends that the state has no compelling interest sufficient to require a parent to submit the children to compelled visitation with the children's grandparents over the parent's objection. She cites no case authority, federal or state, that has so construed and applied the cited constitutional provisions. Appellant argues by analogy, however, that Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609, 104 S.Ct. 3244, 82 L.Ed.2d 462 (1984); Cary v. Population Services, 431 U.S. 678, 97 S.Ct. 2010, 52 L.Ed.2d 675 (1977); Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494, 97 S.Ct. 1932, 52 L.Ed.2d 531 (1977); Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973); Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 92 S.Ct. 1526, 32 L.Ed.2d 15 (1972); Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 85 S.Ct. 1678, 14 L.Ed.2d 510 (1963); Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 45 S.Ct. 571, 69 L.Ed. 1070 (1924); Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 43 S.Ct. 625, 67 L.Ed. 1042 (1923); In re T.W., 551 So.2d 1186 (Fla.1989); Winfield v. Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, 477 So.2d 544 (Fla.1985); Harden v. Thomas, 329 So.2d 389 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); and In re Guardianship of Barry, 445 So.2d 365 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984), support her contention that she has such a privacy right in respect to her children and that the subject statute is facially unconstitutional because it unreasonably interferes with that right.

We find nothing in those cases, however, that would preclude the state from passing a statute providing for reasonable visitation by a grandparent with the grandchildren upon the finding that such visitation is in the children's best interest. The state has a sufficiently compelling interest in the welfare of children that it can provide for the continuation of relations between children and their grandparents under reasonable terms and conditions so long as that is in the children's interest. Since that is all the challenged statute purports to do, it is not facially unconstitutional.

We now address the reasonableness of the order. In July 1987, Ben Sketo, Anna Sketo's husband and Patricia Brown's son, died. The Sketos had two children, Brian and Brittney, who were 3 years old and 14 months old, respectively, at the time of their father's death. Prior to Mr. Sketo's death, the family lived in California and Washington. After his death, Mrs. Sketo and her two children moved to Tallahassee, where both the maternal and paternal grandparents resided. Patricia Brown had minimal contact with the Sketo children while they were living on the west coast, primarily due to the physical distance between them, and visited them only on rare occasions. She kept the children for a few days around the time of her son's death, however, and subsequently visited them in their new home in Tallahassee on...

To continue reading

Request your trial
24 cases
  • Brooks v. Parkerson
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 17 Marzo 1995
    ...to the best interests of the child. [Cit.]" Spradling v. Harris, 13 Kan.App.2d 595, 778 P.2d 365, 367 (1989). In Sketo v. Brown, 559 So.2d 381, 382 (Fla.App.1990) , the Florida Court of Appeals held that "[t]he state has a sufficiently compelling interest in the welfare of children that it ......
  • Von Eiff v. Azicri, 96-3273
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 17 Septiembre 1997
    ...is a case where the state acts to insure the continuity of visitation already encouraged by a deceased parent. 10 In Sketo v. Brown, 559 So.2d 381 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), the First District faced a factually similar situation. There, the father died and the paternal grandparents sought visitat......
  • Custody of Smith, In re
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • 24 Diciembre 1998
    ...child, have upheld those Campbell v. Campbell, 896 P.2d 635, 644 n. 18 (Utah App.1995). statutes as constitutional. See Sketo v. Brown, 559 So.2d 381, 382 (Fla.App.1990); Bailey v. Menzie, 542 N.E.2d 1015, 1020 (Ind.App.1989); Spradling v. Harris, 13 Kan.App.2d 595, 778 P.2d 365, 368 (1989)......
  • Campbell v. Campbell
    • United States
    • Utah Court of Appeals
    • 18 Mayo 1995
    ...statutes authorizing visitation if in the best interest of the child, have upheld those statutes as constitutional. See Sketo v. Brown, 559 So.2d 381, 382 (Fla.App.1990); Bailey v. Menzie, 542 N.E.2d 1015, 1020 (Ind.App.1989); Spradling v. Harris, 13 Kan.App.2d 595, 778 P.2d 365, 368 (1989)......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Happiness is being a grandparent? The evolution of grandparent visitation in Florida.
    • United States
    • Florida Bar Journal Vol. 71 No. 10, November - November 1997
    • 1 Noviembre 1997
    ...Also in 1990, the constitutionality of Florida's grandparent visitation statute was challenged in the oft-cited case Sketo v. Brown, 559 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). In Sketo, the mother/respondent argued that F.S. [sections] 752.01 was unconstitutional because it violated her right to p......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT