California Court of Appeal

Family Code 3104, which allows grandparent visitation rights, is not facially unconstitutional, but when a fit custodial parent opposes visitation, the grandparents must show by clear and convincing evidence that the parent's decision would be detrimental to the child.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/24/2001
• Published 09/24/2001

Judges

• HALLER, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Law Offices of Jeffrey W. Doeringer, Family Law Appellate Associates, Jeffrey W. Doeringer, Huntington Beach, for Appellant., Karen A. Wyle, Julie E. Mumma, Sacramento, Guralnick & Gilliland and Anne L. Rauch, San Diego, for Coalition for Restoration of Parental Rights as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Appellant., Martha Matthews, Mark D. Rosenbaum, Los Angeles, Charles A. Bird, San Diego, Jordan C. Budd, Joan H. Hollinger, Shannon Minter and Shannan Wilber, San Francisco, for the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, ACLU Foundation of San Diego and Imperial Counties, Child Advocacy Program Law School-Boalt Hall, National Center for Lesbian Rights and the Youth Law Center as Amici Curiae on behalf of Appellant., David Borges;  Law Offices of Gollub & Golsan, Lorraine Gollub, Culver City;  Cooper-Gordon, Freida Gordon;  Dawn Gray, Grass Valley;  and Stephen Temko for the Association of Certified Family Law Specialists as Amicus Curiae upon the request of the Court of Appeal., Lawrence E. Fluharty for the Los Angeles Chapter of the National Association of Counsel for Children as Amicus Curiae., Myron Dean Quon and Patricia M. Logue for Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc. as Amicus Curiae.


• For Appellees:
  
• Law Offices of Paul W. Leehey, Paul W. Leehey for Respondents., William Wesley Patton as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Respondents.