Background
The Department of Human Services initiated abuse and neglect proceedings in January 2023 against O.D.’s parents for drug addiction, inadequate housing, and noncompliance with services. The paternal grandmother, C.C., initially lived in North Carolina but requested placement of the child. While a home study was being conducted under the Interstate Compact, O.D. was placed with foster parents (the petitioners) on July 28, 2023.
O.D.’s parents’ parental rights were terminated in September 2023. C.C. eventually moved to West Virginia and became the primary permanency plan. By April 2024, O.D. was spending time with both C.C. and the foster parents. As the permanency hearing approached, the petitioners moved to intervene in the case, seeking permanent placement and adoption of O.D.
The circuit court denied the petitioners’ motion to intervene on August 20, 2024, but afforded them a meaningful opportunity to be heard at the permanency hearing, including the right to call and cross-examine witnesses. After the hearing, the court determined on October 29, 2024, that placement with C.C. for adoption was in O.D.’s best interests and was supported by the statutory presumption favoring grandparent adoptive placements.
The Court’s Holding
The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia dismissed the foster parents’ appeal on two independent grounds. First, the petitioners’ challenge to the order denying intervenor status was untimely. The circuit court entered the denial order on August 20, 2024, but the petitioners did not file their notice of appeal until December 2, 2024—more than 100 days later. West Virginia Rule of Appellate Procedure 11(b) requires that such an appeal be filed within thirty days of the order’s entry.
Second, the Court held that the foster parents lacked standing to challenge the permanency placement decision. Under In re H.W., 247 W. Va. 109 (2022), non-intervenor foster parents who were denied intervention status cannot appeal substantive rulings concerning the underlying abuse and neglect case. Their appellate rights are limited to challenging the order denying intervention itself. Because the petitioners were denied intervention and were never a concurrent placement plan, they had no standing to contest the permanent placement decision.
Key Takeaways
- Foster parents denied intervenor status in abuse and neglect proceedings lack standing to appeal the court’s permanency placement decisions, even if afforded a meaningful opportunity to be heard.
- Challenges to orders denying intervention in child abuse and neglect cases must be appealed within thirty days under West Virginia Rule of Appellate Procedure 11(b), with perfection required within sixty days.
- West Virginia law establishes a statutory presumption favoring grandparent adoptive placements under W. Va. Code § 49-4-114(3), which can be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence.
Why It Matters
This decision clarifies the procedural and substantive barriers facing foster parents seeking to prevent placement with biological relatives in permanency proceedings. Even when foster parents have cared for a child and are given the opportunity to present their case, they cannot appeal an adverse permanency decision if denied intervenor status. The ruling emphasizes the distinction between procedural participation rights and substantive appellate rights in child welfare cases.
The decision reinforces West Virginia’s policy preference for relative, particularly grandparent, placements and adoption. It also demonstrates how procedural compliance—here, strict adherence to appellate filing deadlines—can be dispositive in family law matters. Foster parents and their counsel must understand that intervention status is critical to preserving appellate rights in permanency proceedings.