IN RE: AV.W. (2024)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Case Summary

[1] W.A. (“Mother”) and A.W. (“Father”) are the parents of Av.W., Al.W., and J.W. (collectively, the “Children”). After Mother and Father divorced, Mother was awarded physical custody of the Children. On November 14, 2023, the Indiana Department of Child Services (“DCS”) filed petitions alleging that the Children were children in need of services (“CHINS”). Father subsequently requested a custody modification. Mother eventually admitted that the Children were CHINS. The juvenile court granted Father's request, awarding him temporary physical custody of the Children. The juvenile court also dismissed the CHINS action with approval from DCS. Mother appeals the trial court's order awarding Father temporary physical custody of the Children. However, because the juvenile court issued a final custody order on April 8, 2024, we dismiss Mother's appeal of the temporary custody order as moot.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] After Mother and Father divorced, Mother was awarded physical custody of the Children. On November 14, 2023, DCS filed petitions alleging that the Children were CHINS. The CHINS petitions alleged that Mother and her boyfriend had engaged in domestic violence in the presence of the Children and that the Children did not feel safe in Mother's home. On February 14, 2024, Father filed a motion to modify custody, seeking primary physical and sole legal custody of the Children.

[3] On February 20, 2024, Mother signed an agreed entry in which she admitted that the Children were CHINS. Mother repeated her admission that the Children were CHINS during the fact-finding hearing that was conducted the next day. At the conclusion of the hearing, the juvenile court stated the following:

Well, given [M]other's acknowledgment that the Children are [CHINS] in her care and a lack of evidence regarding um, any concerns for the Children in the care of [F]ather, the court is going to grant [F]ather's request for temporary custody pursuant to Indiana code 31-30-1-12․ So the court will grant that motion.

Tr. Vol. II p. 15. With agreement from DCS, the juvenile court also dismissed the CHINS actions.

Discussion and Decision

[4] While Mother's appellate brief styles her appeal as an appeal involving the underlying DCS matter, her argument on appeal relates entirely to the portion of the juvenile court's order granting Father temporary physical custody of the Children. To the extent that the juvenile court's order modified custody of the Children, the order was only temporary. Events that have occurred since the date of the challenged order have rendered the trial court's temporary custody order moot.

[5] “A case is moot ‘when it is no longer live and the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome or when no effective relief can be rendered.’ ” Bookwalter v. Ind. Election Comm'n, 209 N.E.3d 438, 443 (Ind. Ct. App. 2023) (quoting Liddle v. Clark, 107 N.E.3d 478, 481 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018), trans. denied), trans. denied. Here, no effective relief can be rendered with regard to the temporary custody order because, in the time since the issuance of that order, the juvenile court has conducted a custody-modification hearing and issued a final order modifying custody of the Children. Mother's appeal in this case does not include an appeal of that order, which was issued on April 8, 2024. (See Odyssey docket for the related custody proceedings in Cause Number 49D16-2210-DC-7809) Further, while we recognize that “Indiana courts recognize an exception to the mootness doctrine for matters of great public interest which are likely to recur,” see id. (internal brackets and quotation omitted), we cannot say that the juvenile court's temporary custody order falls under this exception. Because the issue presented is moot, we dismiss the instant appeal.

[6] Dismissed.

Bradford, Judge.

Bailey, J., and Foley, J., concur.