AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• In 2007, a kinship guardian was appointed for two children under the Kinship Guardianship Act (KGA), and the children lived with their maternal aunt, the Guardian, since then. In 2010, the Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD) took custody of the children and filed a neglect/abuse petition against the mother, father, stepfather, and Guardian. Initially, CYFD proposed reunification with the Guardian, but later changed the permanency plan to adoption, seeking to dismiss the Guardian from the proceedings (paras 3-5).

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County, John J. Romero, District Judge: Guardian was dismissed from the case over her objection, and all subsequent orders entered without notice to her were reversed (para 20).

Parties' Submissions

• Guardian: Argued that she could not be dismissed from the abuse and neglect proceedings until her kinship guardianship was terminated pursuant to the Act or revoked pursuant to procedures set forth in the KGA. Insisted she should be afforded the same or similar due process rights as a biological parent (para 8).
• CYFD: Filed a motion to dismiss Guardian from the proceedings, stating the permanency plan for the children changed from reunification with Guardian to adoption. Asserted that since Guardian is not a parent with parental rights to terminate, she was not an appropriate party to the termination of parental rights proceedings (para 5).

Legal Issues

• Whether a kinship guardian named as a respondent in an abuse and neglect proceeding is a necessary and indispensable party in the case and cannot be involuntarily dismissed without first revoking the kinship guardianship according to the procedures specified in the KGA (para 1).
• Whether the kinship guardian should be afforded the same or similar due process rights as a biological parent in the abuse and neglect proceedings (para 8).

Disposition

• The order dismissing the Guardian and all subsequent orders entered without notice to her were reversed. The matter was remanded to the district court to reinstate the Guardian as a party respondent in the matter and for further proceedings in accordance with law (para 20).

Reasons

• The Court held that the Guardian was a necessary and indispensable party in the abuse and neglect case by virtue of her legal status as a kinship guardian. Since her status as Guardian was not terminated under the KGA, the district court erred in dismissing her from the case over her objection. The Court did not address the due process argument because it reversed on the premise that the Guardian could not be dismissed without terminating her kinship guardianship status first. The Court also noted that an adoption cannot take place while the kinship guardianship still exists, emphasizing the Guardian's statutory rights and duties under the KGA and the necessity of following specific procedures for terminating kinship guardianship (paras 2, 9-18).