Grandparent Visitation Petition

PETITION FOR GRANDPARENT VISITATION

(Utah — Utah Code § 30-5-2)

I. PARTIES

1.1 Petitioner(s) — Grandparent(s)

Co-Petitioner (spouse / other grandparent), if applicable:

1.2 Respondent(s) — Parent(s) / Custodian

1.3 The Grandchild

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2.1 Subject-matter jurisdiction. This Court has jurisdiction under Utah Code § 30-5-2(1), which authorizes a grandparent to bring an action requesting visitation in the district court by petition, or to file a petition for visitation rights in a pending divorce proceeding or other proceeding involving custody and visitation issues. "District court" means the district court with proper jurisdiction over the grandchild. Utah Code § 30-5-1(1).

2.2 UCCJEA home state. Utah is the home state of the grandchild under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, Utah Code §§ 78B-13-101 et seq., because:

☐ The child has lived in Utah with a parent or person acting as a parent for at least six (6) consecutive months immediately before the filing of this Petition; or

☐ Utah was the child's home state within six (6) months before filing and a parent or person acting as a parent continues to live in this State; or

☐ Other basis under Utah Code § 78B-13-201: [____________]

2.3 Venue. Venue is proper in [COUNTY] County because the grandchild resides in this county.

2.4 Other proceedings.

☐ There are no other pending or prior proceedings concerning the custody or visitation of the grandchild.

☐ This Petition is filed within / relates to the following pending proceeding — Court: [____________]; Case No.: [____________]; Nature: [____________].

III. STANDING

3.1 Petitioner is a "grandparent" within the meaning of Utah Code § 30-5-1(3) and has standing under Utah Code § 30-5-2(1)(a) to bring this action by petition in district court.

☐ This is an original action brought by petition.

☐ This is a petition for visitation filed in a pending divorce or other custody/visitation proceeding under Utah Code § 30-5-2(1)(b): [____________]

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

4.1 History and nature of the relationship. Petitioner has had a substantial relationship with the grandchild, as follows:

[____________________________________________________________]

4.2 Substantial custodian- or caregiver-like relationship — § 30-5-2(2)(c)(i)(B). Petitioner has substantially acted as the grandchild's custodian or caregiver, or has a substantial custodian- or caregiver-like relationship with the grandchild, as shown by:

[____________________________________________________________]

4.3 Likely substantial harm from loss of the relationship — § 30-5-2(2)(c)(i)(C). The loss or cessation of that relationship is likely to cause substantial harm to the grandchild, as shown by:

[____________________________________________________________]

4.4 Denial or unreasonable limitation of visitation. Visitation has been denied or unreasonably limited, as follows:

[____________________________________________________________]

V. CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY STANDARD

5.1 Parental right; special weight (Troxel). Petitioner acknowledges that a parent retains the fundamental right and duty to exercise primary control over the care, supervision, upbringing, and education of the parent's child, and that a fit parent's decision regarding grandparent visitation is entitled to special weight. Utah Code § 30-5-2(2)(a); Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000).

5.2 Rebuttable presumption — § 30-5-2(2)(b). Petitioner acknowledges there is a rebuttable presumption that a parent's decision with regard to grandparent visitation is in the grandchild's best interest.

5.3 Clear-and-convincing rebuttal — § 30-5-2(2)(c). To rebut the presumption and obtain reasonable visitation, Petitioner must establish, by clear and convincing evidence, either:

☐ (i) all of the following — (A) Petitioner is a fit and proper individual to have visitation with the grandchild; (B) Petitioner has substantially acted as the grandchild's custodian or caregiver, or has a substantial custodian- or caregiver-like relationship with the grandchild; (C) the loss or cessation of that relationship is likely to cause substantial harm to the grandchild; and (D) visitation is in the best interest of the grandchild; OR

☐ (ii) Petitioner is a fit and proper individual to have visitation with the grandchild and both parents are unfit or incompetent.

5.4 Strict scrutiny (Jones). Petitioner acknowledges that an order granting grandparent visitation under § 30-5-2 is subject to strict scrutiny and must be narrowly tailored to advance a compelling governmental interest — proof of substantial harm to the grandchild from the loss of a custodian- or caregiver-like relationship. Jones v. Jones, 2015 UT 84, 359 P.3d 603.

VI. BEST INTEREST OF THE GRANDCHILD

6.1 Petitioner alleges, and is prepared to prove by clear and convincing evidence, that the visitation requested is in the best interest of the grandchild, considering:

☐ Petitioner's capacity and disposition to give the child love, affection, and guidance;

☐ The depth, quality, and length of the custodian- or caregiver-like relationship;

☐ The grandchild's need for continuity of an established caregiving relationship;

☐ Petitioner's willingness to facilitate and not interfere with the parent-child relationship;

☐ Any other relevant factor: [____________]

6.2 Supporting facts:

[____________________________________________________________]

6.3 Child's preference (if 14 or older). Pursuant to Utah Code § 30-5-2(4), if the grandchild is 14 years of age or older, the Court may inquire of the grandchild and take into account the grandchild's desires regarding visitation.

☐ The grandchild is 14 or older and has expressed a desire regarding visitation: [____________]

☐ The grandchild is under 14.

VII. PROPOSED VISITATION SCHEDULE

7.1 Regular visitation. Petitioner requests:

☐ Weekly: [____________] ☐ Monthly: [____________] ☐ Other: [____________]

7.2 Holidays and special occasions.

7.3 Telephone / electronic contact. [____________]

7.4 Transportation / exchange. [____________]

VIII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court:

A. Find that Petitioner has standing under Utah Code § 30-5-2(1);

B. Find that Petitioner has rebutted the presumption in Utah Code § 30-5-2(2)(b) by clear and convincing evidence under § 30-5-2(2)(c);

C. Enter an order awarding Petitioner reasonable visitation with the grandchild under the schedule in Section VII, or as the Court deems just and narrowly tailored;

D. Make written findings of fact and conclusions of law in support of its ruling;

E. Award costs of this action; and

F. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

IX. VERIFICATION

STATE OF UTAH )
COUNTY OF [____________] )

I, [PETITIONER NAME], being first duly sworn, state that I am the Petitioner in this action; that I have read the foregoing Petition; and that the facts stated therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

_________________________________
[PETITIONER NAME], Petitioner

Subscribed and sworn to before me this ___ day of __________, 20___.

_________________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: ___________

X. SIGNATURE

Respectfully submitted this ___ day of __________, 20___.

_________________________________
[PETITIONER NAME], Pro Se
OR
_________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME], Utah Bar No. [____________]
[FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS] | [PHONE] | [EMAIL]
Attorney for Petitioner

XI. NOTICE TO RESPONDENT

TO THE RESPONDENT(S): A Petition for Grandparent Visitation has been filed against you. You are required to file a written answer or other response with the Clerk of this Court within twenty-one (21) days after service of this Petition (or as otherwise required by the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure), and to serve a copy on Petitioner or Petitioner's attorney. If you fail to do so, judgment by default may be entered against you for the relief demanded in the Petition. You have the right to be represented by an attorney.

XII. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on [__/__/____] a true and correct copy of the foregoing Petition (and accompanying UCCJEA affidavit) was served upon each Respondent by ☐ personal service ☐ certified mail ☐ service of process server ☐ electronic service ☐ other [____________], at the address(es) listed above.

_________________________________
[PETITIONER / ATTORNEY SIGNATURE]

SOURCES & REFERENCES

• Utah Code § 30-5-2 — Visitation rights of grandparents: standing (1); parental right / public policy (2)(a); rebuttable presumption (2)(b); clear-and-convincing rebuttal factors — fit and proper, substantial custodian/caregiver relationship, likely substantial harm, best interest, or both parents unfit/incompetent (2)(c); child 14+ preference (4); modification (5).
• Utah Code § 30-5-1 — definitions (district court; grandchild; grandparent).
• Utah Code §§ 78B-13-101 et seq. — UCCJEA; § 78B-13-209 (affidavit).
• Jones v. Jones, 2015 UT 84, 359 P.3d 603 — grandparent-visitation orders subject to strict scrutiny; proof of substantial harm from loss of a custodian/caregiver-like relationship; basis for the 2020 statutory amendments.
• Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) — a fit parent's decision is entitled to special weight.

This Petition is a preparation aid only. Utah grandparent-visitation law imposes a high, constitutionally sensitive burden — clear and convincing proof rebutting the presumption favoring a fit parent's decision, including a custodian- or caregiver-like relationship and likely substantial harm from its loss, under the strict-scrutiny standard of Jones v. Jones. Consult a licensed Utah family law attorney before filing.