In Re Derzapf

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that step- grandfather’s suit should be dismissed because he lacked a justiciable interest and standing due to his failure to satisfy the requirements of the applicable standing statute in the Family Code
• noting that suits for grandparent access are governed by chapter 153, which has different standing requirements than grandparent suits for conservatorship
• holding grandmother did not meet her statutory burden to show significant impairment despite evidence of child’s “lingering sadness” about lack of contact with grandparents
• explaining that the State may not “infringe on the fundamental right of parents to make child rearing decisions simply because a state judge believes a ‘better decision’ could be made” (quoting Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 72–73 (2000) (plurality opinion))
• applying Troxel to hold depriving a parent of access to her child even temporarily presents extraordinary circumstances
• discussing the history of Texas grandparent access right statutes beginning in 1995

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).