- 711 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

28 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF TANNER H. & TA’NNYA H.

Cite as 28 Neb. App. 711

In re Interest of Tanner H. and Ta’Nnya H., 

children under 18 years of age.

State of Nebraska, appellee, 

v. Shearetta S., appellant.

___ N.W.2d ___

Filed August 4, 2020. No. A-19-1177.

1. Juvenile Courts: Appeal and Error. An appellate court reviews juvenile cases de novo on the record and reaches a conclusion independently 

of the juvenile court’s findings.

2. Judgments: Jurisdiction: Appeal and Error. A jurisdictional question that does not involve a factual dispute is a question of law. When 

reviewing questions of law, an appellate court resolves the questions 

independently of the conclusions reached by the trial court.

3. Standing: Words and Phrases. Standing involves a real interest in the 

cause of action, meaning some legal or equitable right, title, or interest 

in the subject matter of the controversy.

4. Standing: Parties. The purpose of the standing inquiry is to determine 

whether a person has a legally protectable interest or right in the controversy that would benefit by the relief to be granted.

5. Standing: Proof. Persons claiming standing must show that their claim 

is premised on their own legal rights and not the rights of another.

6. Standing: Jurisdiction: Parties. Standing is a jurisdictional component 

of a party’s case, because only a party who has standing may invoke the 

jurisdiction of a court.

7. Parental Rights: Interventions. Grandparents have a direct legal interest in juvenile dependency proceedings involving their biological or 

adopted grandchildren that entitles them to intervene as a matter of right 

in such proceedings, prior to final disposition.

8. Parental Rights. The rights of grandparents are altered once their own 

child terminates his or her parental rights to the grandchildren.

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library

www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/

08/04/2020 08:07 AM CDT
- 712 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

28 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF TANNER H. & TA’NNYA H.

Cite as 28 Neb. App. 711

9. Parent and Child. A foster parent may have a role in a juvenile proceeding, but it does not confer on him or her a right, title, or interest in 

the subject matter of the controversy.

10. Juvenile Courts: Parental Rights: Appeal and Error. The right to 

appeal in a juvenile case is purely statutory, and neither foster parents nor grandparents, as such, have a statutory right to appeal from 

a juvenile court order pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2,106.01(2) 

(Reissue 2016).

Appeal from the Separate Juvenile Court of Douglas County: 

Chad M. Brown, Judge. Appeal dismissed.

Anne E. Troia, P.C., L.L.O., for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

Pirtle, Bishop, and Welch, Judges.

Pirtle, Judge.

INTRODUCTION

This is an appeal from an order issued by the separate 

juvenile court of Douglas County, Nebraska, revoking the 

biological maternal grandmother’s intervenor status. Because 

she lacked standing to appeal from this order, we dismiss the 

appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

BACKGROUND

Shearetta S. is the biological maternal grandmother of the 

children in this case. Shearetta was allowed to intervene on 

that basis and, for a time, was the foster placement for her 

grandchildren. On November 14, 2019, an adoption review 

hearing was held and Shearetta appeared with her lawyer. At 

the start of the hearing, the lawyer for Nebraska’s Foster Care 

Review Office made an oral motion to revoke Shearetta’s 

intervenor status because Shearetta’s parental rights to the 

mother of the children had been terminated in 2004 and 

because the mother of these children had also relinquished 

her parental rights. It was the Foster Care Review Office’s 

position that Shearetta’s status had been reduced to a “foster 
- 713 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

28 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF TANNER H. & TA’NNYA H.

Cite as 28 Neb. App. 711

parent” and that foster parents do not have the right to intervene in any case.

While acknowledging Shearetta’s parental rights had in fact 

been terminated in 2004, Shearetta’s lawyer reminded the court 

that neither the State nor the guardian ad litem had objected to 

granting Shearetta’s intervenor status as the maternal grandmother. But Shearetta’s lawyer agreed that as soon as “the 

parental relationships [were] terminated,” Shearetta “los[t] her 

standing as a grandparent.”

The court granted the oral motion to revoke Shearetta’s 

intervenor status because “standing of your client is always 

an issue that rises to the top” and because the motion to 

revoke had been made, so the court needed to address it in the 

moment. The county attorney suggested the motion be set for 

an evidentiary hearing, because no notice of the motion had 

been given. Shearetta took that position as well. The court 

acknowledged there was no notice given to Shearetta, but the 

court said it would take judicial notice of its file, indicating the 

biological mother had in fact relinquished her parental rights, 

so setting a hearing would not change the facts. Shearetta 

appeals from the order revoking her intervenor status, because 

she was not given any notice that her intervention in the case 

was at risk.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR

Shearetta assigns as error the juvenile court’s order that her 

intervenor status could be revoked without proper notice to her 

and her lawyer.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

[1,2] An appellate court reviews juvenile cases de novo 

on the record and reaches a conclusion independently of the 

juvenile court’s findings. In re Interest of Enyce J. & Eternity 

M., 291 Neb. 965, 870 N.W.2d 413 (2015). A jurisdictional 

question that does not involve a factual dispute is a question of law. When reviewing questions of law, an appellate 
- 714 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

28 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF TANNER H. & TA’NNYA H.

Cite as 28 Neb. App. 711

court resolves the questions independently of the conclusions 

reached by the trial court. Id.

ANALYSIS

[3-6] Standing involves a real interest in the cause of action, 

meaning some legal or equitable right, title, or interest in the 

subject matter of the controversy. In re Interest of Jackson 

E., 293 Neb. 84, 875 N.W.2d 863 (2016). The purpose of the 

standing inquiry is to determine whether a person has a legally 

protectable interest or right in the controversy that would benefit by the relief to be granted. In re Interest of Enyce J. & 

Eternity M., supra. Persons claiming standing must show that 

their claim is premised on their own legal rights and not the 

rights of another. In re Interest of Jackson E., supra. Standing 

is a jurisdictional component of a party’s case, because only 

a party who has standing may invoke the jurisdiction of a 

court. Id.

In her brief’s “Statement of Jurisdiction,” Shearetta cites us 

to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2,106.01 (Reissue 2016), as the basis 

for our jurisdiction for this appeal, which states: “(2) An appeal 

[of any final order or judgment entered by a juvenile court] 

may be taken by: (a) The juvenile; (b) The guardian ad litem; 

(c) The juvenile’s parent, custodian, or guardian.” However, 

Shearetta is, at best, only a foster parent.

[7,8] Grandparents have a direct legal interest in juvenile 

dependency proceedings involving their biological or adopted 

grandchildren that entitles them to intervene as a matter of right 

in such proceedings, prior to final disposition. See In re Interest 

of Kayle C. & Kylee C., 253 Neb. 685, 574 N.W.2d 473 (1998). 

However, the rights of grandparents are altered once their own 

child terminates his or her parental rights to the grandchildren. 

See id. Because Shearetta’s daughter relinquished her parental 

rights to Shearetta’s grandchildren, Shearetta no longer had a 

legal interest, or standing, in the juvenile court proceedings as 

a grandparent.

[9,10] As a foster parent, Shearetta’s right to participate 

in the juvenile court proceeding is limited. A foster parent is 
- 715 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

28 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF TANNER H. & TA’NNYA H.

Cite as 28 Neb. App. 711

entitled to notice of hearings, but notice “shall not be construed 

to require that such foster parent . . . is a necessary party to 

the review or hearing.” Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-1314(2) (Reissue 

2016). A foster parent may have a role in a juvenile proceeding, but it does not confer on him or her a right, title, or interest in the subject matter of the controversy. See In re Interest 

of Enyce J. & Eternity M., supra. Since Shearetta no longer 

had standing to intervene as a necessary party, she has no 

right to appeal from the juvenile court’s decision revoking her 

intervenor status. See, also, In re Interest of Jackson E., supra

(right to appeal in juvenile case is purely statutory, and neither 

foster parents nor grandparents, as such, have statutory right to 

appeal from juvenile court order pursuant to § 43-2,106.01(2)). 

Accordingly, we dismiss Shearetta’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction, because she had no standing to appeal.

CONCLUSION

Because Shearetta had no standing to appeal, the appeal is 

dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Appeal dismissed.