People ex rel. A.M.B.

Colorado Court of Appeals

People ex rel. A.M.B.

946 P.2d 607, 1997 Colo. J. C.A.R. 2123, 1997 Colo. App. LEXIS 223

CourtColorado Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 2, 1997

DocketNo. 97CA0142

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 946 P.2d 607 (People ex rel. A.M.B.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Colorado Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People ex rel. A.M.B., 946 P.2d 607, 1997 Colo. J. C.A.R. 2123, 1997 Colo. App. LEXIS 223 (Colo. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Judge HUME.

M.B. (mother) appeals from a trial court judgment granting the motion of M.K.N. (maternal grandmother) for grandparent visitation with the child A.M.B. The sole issue presented is whether an administrative paternity proceeding is a “child custody case” for purposes of the grandparent visitation statute, § 19-1-117, C.R.S.1997. We conclude that it is and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Prior to the filing of the motion for grandparent visitation, an administrative proceeding had been brought to determine the paternity of A.M.B. Issues concerning custody of the child were not raised in the proceeding.

Under § 19-1-117(1), C.R.S.1997, a grandparent may seek an order granting reasonable visitation rights with a grandchild only “when there is or has been a child custody case.” The statutory definition of a “child custody case” expressly includes cases that have an impact on the custody of a child, regardless of whether child custody was an issue in the matter. Section 19-1-117(1); F.H. v. K.L.M., 740 P.2d 1006 (Colo.App.1987).

Paternity of a child may be determined in an action brought under the Uniform Parentage Act, § 19-4-101, et seq., C.R.S.1997, or in an administrative proceeding brought pursuant to § 26-13.5-110, C.R.S.1997. An order establishing paternity under § 26-13.5-110 has all the force, effect, and remedies of an order of the district court. Section 26-13.5-110(2), C.R.S.1997. Thus, in addition to imposing an obligation for the payment of support, an order entered in an administrative paternity proceeding may have an impact on a parent’s custodial rights to the child. See § 26-13.5-105(3)(d), C.R.S.1997.

We, therefore, conclude that an administrative paternity proceeding is a child custody case within the meaning of § 19-1-117(1). See In re Marriage of Davisson, 797 P.2d 809 (Colo.App.1990). Hence, the maternal [608]*608grandmother had standing to seek visitation under the statute.

Judgment affirmed.

JONES and BRIGGS, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion by

Judge HUME.

M.B. (mother) appeals from a trial court judgment granting the motion of M.K.N. (maternal grandmother) for grandparent visitation with the child A.M.B. The sole issue presented is whether an administrative paternity proceeding is a “child custody case” for purposes of the grandparent visitation statute, § 19-1-117, C.R.S.1997. We conclude that it is and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Prior to the filing of the motion for grandparent visitation, an administrative proceeding had been brought to determine the paternity of A.M.B. Issues concerning custody of the child were not raised in the proceeding.

Under § 19-1-117(1), C.R.S.1997, a grandparent may seek an order granting reasonable visitation rights with a grandchild only “when there is or has been a child custody case.” The statutory definition of a “child custody case” expressly includes cases that have an impact on the custody of a child, regardless of whether child custody was an issue in the matter. Section 19-1-117(1); F.H. v. K.L.M., 740 P.2d 1006 (Colo.App.1987).

Paternity of a child may be determined in an action brought under the Uniform Parentage Act, § 19-4-101, et seq., C.R.S.1997, or in an administrative proceeding brought pursuant to § 26-13.5-110, C.R.S.1997. An order establishing paternity under § 26-13.5-110 has all the force, effect, and remedies of an order of the district court. Section 26-13.5-110(2), C.R.S.1997. Thus, in addition to imposing an obligation for the payment of support, an order entered in an administrative paternity proceeding may have an impact on a parent’s custodial rights to the child. See § 26-13.5-105(3)(d), C.R.S.1997.

We, therefore, conclude that an administrative paternity proceeding is a child custody case within the meaning of § 19-1-117(1). See In re Marriage of Davisson, 797 P.2d 809 (Colo.App.1990). Hence, the maternal [608]*608grandmother had standing to seek visitation under the statute.

Judgment affirmed.

JONES and BRIGGS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

946 P.2d 607, 1997 Colo. J. C.A.R. 2123, 1997 Colo. App. LEXIS 223, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-amb-coloctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack