Liebner v. Simcox

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining mother had cited no case law to support the proposition that once attained, in loco parentis status could be lost due to change in circumstances
• rejecting argument “that once in loco parentis status has been obtained, it can be lost” due to post-separation conduct
• concluding the mother’s ex-boyfriend stood in loco parentis to the child and had standing to seek visitation, where he lived with the mother and child for three years as a family unit and maintained contact with the child after the parties’ separation
• explaining mother had cited no case law to support the proposition that once attained, in loco parentis status could be lost due to change in circumstances
• “We also reject Mother’s argument that even if Michael had obtained in loco parentis status, such status has been lost by a change in circumstances, namely the parties’ separation and Mother’s remarriage.”
• “Persons other than biological parents are third parties for purposes of custody disputes.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).