Summary 2009 WY 76

Summary of Decision issued June 9, 2009

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: In re: Guardianship of CPR & AR

Citation: 2009 WY 76

Docket Number: S-08-0108

Appeal from the District Court of Carbon County, the Honorable Wade E. Waldrip, Judge.

Representing Appellant TR: Gregory L. Winn of Schilling & Winn, PC, Laramie, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee LVM & ARM: Janet L. Tyler, Laramie, Wyoming.

Facts/Discussion: TR (Mother) appealed a district court’s decision and order finding her unfit and appointing LVM and ARM (Grandparents) who are the children’s paternal grandparents, guardians of her two minor children, AR and CR.

Admission of evidence; witness testimony: The decision of whether or not to admit evidence lies within the discretion of the trial court. The district court admitted printouts from the internet as evidence of a proper immunization schedule. The Court stated it was an abuse of discretion to take judicial notice of the facts contained in the document under Rule 201. However, the Court stated it was harmless because the properly admitted medical records showed that Mother did not comply with her own doctor’s immunization schedule. A letter from Father’s doctor describing the treatment of his neurofibromatosis was admitted. Although it was an abuse of discretion to admit the document, the Court found the error was harmless because the district court did not rely on information in the letter to reach its conclusion. Grandmother testified about her personal knowledge of neurofibromatosis which was acceptable to show Grandmother’s fitness to act as guardian.
Denial of motion to bifurcate: In order to show that the trial court abused its discretion, Mother would have to show that the district court’s refusal to bifurcate was outside the bounds of reason based on the criteria set forth in W.R.C.P. 42(b). Mother did not present any evidence that she was prejudiced under the standard by the failure to bifurcate. The determination of Mother’s fitness required extensive testimony from the same witnesses who would have been required to testify as to the best interests of the children in the appointment of Grandparents as guardians.
Were findings of fact inconsistent: The Court reviewed the testimony about the children’s living conditions. While it was apparent that Mother loved her children, the evidence at trial showed that she was not willing to parent or capable of parenting them at this time. Given the evidence, the Court could not conclude that the district court’s finding that Mother was presently unfit was inconsistent with the evidence, clearly erroneous, or contrary to the great weight of the evidence.
Best interests of the children: At the time the district court appointed Grandparents as guardians, Mother had been declared unfit and the children had been found to be in need of a guardian. Grandparents alone petitioned for guardianship. The Court did not find that the district court’s determination that it was in the best interests of AR and CR to appoint Grandparents as guardians inconsistent with the evidence, clearly erroneous, or contrary to the great weight of the evidence.

Conclusion: The Court found that the district court abused its discretion in admitting certain pieces of evidence at trial, but that the error was harmless because the court did not rely on that evidence in making its decision. The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied a motion to bifurcate the trial. The court’s findings that Mother was unfit and that it was in the best interests of AR and CR to appoint Grandparents as guardians were not inconsistent with the evidence, clearly erroneous or contrary to the great weight of the evidence.

Affirmed.

C.J. Voigt delivered the decision.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/munw5z .

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. Please note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]