An interesting case from the ever-evolving battleground of grandparents’ visitation rights, such as they are …
Nevada Father settles original child custody case by agreeing to allow Grandmother four supervised visits with Daughter each year.
Later, a psychologist opines that Grandmother’s visits with Daughter should be unsupervised.
Father, disagreeing with the psychologist, petitions the Nevada family court to modify the prior visitation order and to terminate Grandmother’s visitation rights entirely.
The family court judge sides with Father and terminates Grandmother’s visitation privileges.
On appeal, the Nevada Supreme Court holds that Father fails to establish a substantial change of circumstances, the standard for modification of a judgment or order. Therefore, the original agreement and judgment must stand, and Grandmother’s visitation must be reinstated.
Key to this ruling is that Father is seeking to modify rights already agreed to and ordered, rather than Grandmother seeking to establish new rights for the first time.