Background
Zachary Coria, 36, has Down syndrome, epilepsy, and developmental delays and requires constant assistance. In 2023, his sister, Caitlyn Coria Bepristis, petitioned to serve as Zachary’s co-guardian with his mother, Janice Coria, in part to establish a plan as Zachary’s parents aged. A court visitor and guardian ad litem recommended the appointment after identifying concerns about Zachary’s care environment during visits with his father, Pablo Coria.
After the court granted the co-guardians unrestricted authority, Pablo sought to terminate or limit the guardianship, obtain a fixed visitation schedule, and secure authority to take Zachary to church. The evidence showed that Pablo had improved his home, but that communication problems remained and Zachary sometimes expressed reluctance to visit Pablo or attend church. The district court denied Pablo’s requests, while ordering the parties to meet quarterly to develop a three-month visitation plan when appropriate.
The Court’s Holding
The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed. It held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by declining to impose a fixed visitation schedule and instead allowing the co-guardians to decide the timing and conditions of Zachary’s visits with Pablo.
Colorado’s adult-guardianship statutes do not require visitation orders or prescribe factors for them. Although a district court has authority to limit a guardian’s powers and may enter an order affecting visitation, a rigid schedule could conflict with guardians’ statutory duties to act in the ward’s best interests, consider changing health and safety circumstances, and account for the ward’s expressed preferences. The court also declined to consider Pablo’s underdeveloped arguments concerning removal of the co-guardians, appointment of a psychological expert, and church attendance.
Key Takeaways
- Adult guardianship law does not require Colorado courts to impose family-visitation schedules.
- Courts may have authority to enter visitation-related orders, but any order must respect guardians’ duties to protect the ward and consider the ward’s wishes.
- A parent’s reduced time with an incapacitated adult child does not itself make an unrestricted guardianship excessive.
Why It Matters
The decision distinguishes adult-guardianship visitation disputes from parenting-time disputes involving minor children. It confirms that courts may leave visitation decisions with appointed guardians when the record supports their care of the ward and a fixed schedule would reduce needed flexibility.
The court noted that Pablo may seek reconsideration if the co-guardians unreasonably deny visitation despite his compliance with their guidelines and contrary to Zachary’s wishes.