Rights of person who establishes emotional ties creating child-parent relationship or ongoing personal relationship
- presumption regarding legal parent
- motion for intervention
Source:
Section 109.119 — Rights of person who establishes emotional ties creating child-parent relationship or ongoing personal relationship; presumption regarding legal parent; motion for intervention, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors109.html.
Notes of Decisions
Where custody has been awarded to nonparent, parent seeking to regain custody must show substantial change of circumstance before court may consider whether compelling reason still exists to deny custody to parent. Lear v. Lear, 124 Or App 524, 863 P2d 482 (1993)
Intervenor can have parent-child relationship and fulfill child’s psychological need for parent even though child maintains parent-child relationship with both natural parents. Sorensen and Sorensen, 138 Or App 80, 906 P2d 838 (1995)
Court may withdraw intervenor status of person having parent-child relationship where continued intervention is not in best interest of child. State ex rel State Office for Services to Children and Families v. Fuller, 156 Or App 128, 964 P2d 1140 (1998), Sup Ct review denied
In determining whether visitation with person having ongoing personal relationship with child is appropriate and in best interest of child, court must give significant weight to decision made by fit custodial parent. Harrington v. Daum, 172 Or App 188, 18 P3d 456 (2001)
Term “in part” in definition of child-parent relationship refers to when relationship existed, not to acts establishing nature of relationship. Harrington v. Daum, 172 Or App 188, 18 P3d 456 (2001)
Parent qualifies for presumption favoring award of custody to fit natural parent only if parent has or once had some minimal level of participation in care, custody and control of child. State v. Wooden, 184 Or App 537, 57 P3d 583 (2002)
Finding of substantial change in circumstances is not required for modification of nonparent visitation rights. Meader v. Meader, 194 Or App 31, 94 P3d 123 (2004), Sup Ct review denied
Whether presumption that legal parent acts in best interest of child has been rebutted is determined by evidence as whole, not by presence or absence of listed factors. O’Donnell-Lamont and Lamont, 337 Or 86, 91 P3d 721 (2004)
Legal parent’s provision of “adequate” care requires that care must be more than subsistence level, but need not rise to level of care available from nonparent. O’Donnell-Lamont and Lamont, 337 Or 86, 91 P3d 721 (2004)
Finding of circumstances detrimental to child requires serious present risk of psychological, emotional or physical harm. O’Donnell-Lamont and Lamont, 337 Or 86, 91 P3d 721 (2004)
Rebuttable presumption that legal parent acts in best interest of child adequately protects parent’s due process right under United States Constitution to have special weight given to fit parent’s determination of child’s best interest. O’Donnell-Lamont and Lamont, 337 Or 86, 91 P3d 721 (2004)
Award of attorney fees against intervenor is improper absent finding that intervenor engaged in objectively unreasonable or meritless conduct. Niman and Niman, 206 Or App 400, 136 P3d 1186 (2006)
Determination regarding temporary visitation or contact rights does not have preclusive effect for purpose of final determination of custody, visitation or contact rights. Poet v. Thompson, 208 Or App 442, 144 P3d 1067 (2006)
Nonparent and child who reside in same abode for many, but not all, weekends do not reside in same household on “day-to-day basis.” Jensen v. Bevard, 215 Or App 215, 168 P3d 1209 (2007); Hanson-Parmer and Parmer, 233 Or App 187, 225 P3d 129 (2010)
“Child-parent relationship” on “day-to-day basis” does not require that person have physical custody of child every day and every night of week. Holt and Atterbury, 291 Or App 813, 420 P3d 676 (2018)
Law Review Citations
36 WLR 549 (2000); 82 OLR 1191 (2003); 44 WLR 297 (2007)
Up to date