Legal Opinion · Dissent

Peters v. Costello

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 30, 2005No. 8 EAP 2004Published

1DissentJustice Eakin

My colleagues confer upon a couple, acting in loco parentis to a woman who is now well past the age of minority, standing to pursue court-ordered visitation of the woman’s daughter under the Grandparent Visitation Act. I respectfully dissent.

The question is whether appellees are entitled to the preferred status, conferred only by the statute, enjoyed by grand*120parents of children; as the majority notes, the narrow question before this Court is one of interpretation of that statute.

The Act does not define “grandparents,” it is true, but that word is hardly in need of definition. The term…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Troxel v. GranvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Zane v. Friends HospitalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  3. T.B. v. L.R.M.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  4. T.B. v. L.R.M.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  5. Roth v. WestonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API