Lopez

Lopez v. Martinez

Caution
102 Cal. Rptr. 2d 71·2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 926·2000 Daily Journal DAR 12953·85 Cal. App. 4th 279·2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9724
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 6, 2000B138758California3,716 words

Opinion

Opinion

Johnson, J.

Appellant Elizabeth Martinez has refused to allow respondents, Rachel and Ruben Lopez, to visit her son, Daniel Martinez. Daniel is respondents’ grandson and the biological son of appellant and Carl Blair. Respondents petitioned for visitation rights pursuant to Family Code section 3104, which gives grandparents standing to petition for visitation when a minor’s parents are living separately or one parent has been absent for over a month. Because Carl Blair had been absent since Daniel’s birth, respondents had standing. After respondents’ visitation petition was initiated, Elizabeth’s husband, Hector Martinez, adopted Daniel. Under Family Code section 3104, a court must terminate grandparental visitation should circumstances change so the statutorily defined requirements for standing are no longer met. Although Hector became Daniel’s legal father, the trial court found the adoption was not a “change of circumstances” as intended by the Legislature to mandate automatic termination of visitation upon parental request. We find the trial court’s interpretation of the statute was erroneous and therefore we reverse.

Factual and Procedural Background

In 1990, appellant…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.