Grove v. GroveAnnotate this Case
At the final hearing in the case, the parties to this divorce action, through counsel, indicated they had reached an agreement to all terms of the divorce, property settlement, and child custody issues, and that the only matter the parties were submitting to the court for final resolution was the issue of appellee Husband’s visitation with respect to the two-year old child of the marriage. The parties agreed that Wife would have primary physical custody of the child, and a the fact that Husband had substance abuse problems and was, at that time, in a residential rehabilitation facility for treatment. Further, Wife had concerns about Husband’s ability to ensure the child’s safety during his visits with her. Counsel for Wife stated that he understood the paternal grandparents would like visitation with the child, and informed the trial judge that Wife had several concerns about whether the grandparents would be able to prevent improper conduct by Husband while the child was visiting the grandparents. The judge asked the parties to draw up a parenting plan that addressed the issues resolved at the hearing. The resultant parenting plan was signed by counsel to each party, and it was attached to and became a part of the final judgment and decree of divorce. The terms of the final judgment also contained an award of visitation to the grandparents. Both the parenting plan and the final judgment provided that the paternal grandparents could exercise visitation with the child as a substitute for the father. The signature of Wife’s counsel indicated he approved the final judgment as to form. On appeal, Wife challenged the order’s grant of visitation rights to the paternal grandparents. Having approved the order as to form, the Supreme Court concluded Wife was estopped from asserting on appeal that the form of the order was deficient because it did not include findings of fact. The trial court's judgment was affirmed.