Stanley J. v. Cliff L.

{25} At the outset, I observe that the Majority’s Opinion is silent, and the issues are apparently moot as to Adam, who turned eighteen in June 2013.

{26} I see two reasons that the district court should be affirmed. First, as a matter of law, extraordinary circumstances were present rendering the court’s appointment of Petitioners as guardians appropriate under Section 40-10B-8(B)(3). Second, under Section 40-10B-11(A), Children were permitted to nominate a guardian and, barring a finding by the district court that the appointment of their chosen guardian would be contrary to their best…