Title: Craven v. McCrillis

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

Craven v. McCrillis (2004-157); 178 Vt. 476; 868 A.2d 740

2005 VT  22

[Filed 04-Feb-2005]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                                 2005 VT  22

                      SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2004-157

                             OCTOBER TERM, 2004

  Jesse Craven and Deborah Paradis     }	APPEALED FROM:
                                       }
                                       }
       v.	                       }	Orange Family Court
                                       }	
  Charles McCrillis	               }
                                       }	DOCKET NO. 211-12-96 Oedm

                                                Trial Judge: Brian Burgess

             In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       ¶  1.  Appellant Deborah Paradis, grandmother of Cheyenne McCrillis,
  appeals from a family court's order dismissing her petition for visitation
  with Cheyenne and denying her motion for relief from judgment.  We affirm
  the family court's decision because Paradis failed to rebut the presumption
  of validity attached to father's decision to deny grandparent visitation. 

       ¶  2.  Cheyenne is the child of defendant Charles McCrillis and his
  ex-wife, Jesse Craven.  The final divorce stipulation and order granted
  Craven sole physical rights and responsibilities and shared legal
  responsibility for the child.  Craven died from an illness in 2003.  After
  Craven's death,  father assumed sole physical and legal rights for the
  child.  Although Paradis had a close relationship with the child, father
  decided not to let her visit with Cheyenne.  

       ¶  3.  Paradis filed an action for grandparent visitation pursuant
  to 15 V.S.A. § 1012.  Her petition alleged that she had a very close
  relationship with the child, father was aware that she did not approve of
  how he had treated Craven, and he had not allowed her or any of Craven's
  family contact with the child.  Father moved to dismiss the petition,
  arguing that Glidden v. Conley, 2003 VT 12, 175 Vt. 111,