I haven't read the 44 page opinion yet, but am thrilled to learn that the grandparents of Sean Goldman have been denied a grandparenting time order. These are the reasons cited by the New Jersey court in dismissing their complaint for grandparenting time:
20-4-1043 Goldman v. Goldman, Chan. Div., Family Part (Monmouth Co.) (Guadagno, P.J.F.P.) (44 pp.) In this action filed by the maternal grandparents seeking visitation with their grandson pursuant to the NJ grandparent visitation statute, after they rejected the conditions set by the child's father for visitation, the court dismisses the complaint because:
(1) the grandparents' conduct in assisting their now deceased daughter to remove the child, a United States citizen, to her native Brazil and to keep him there, thus frustrating the father's parental rights, and in alleging that the father had abandoned the child, was outrageous;
(2) their actions caused harm to the child;
(3) their admittedly strong bond with the child was achieved as a result of the wrongful detention of the child and their continued illicit efforts after their daughter's death;
(4) their expert's report recommending visitation displays little comprehension of the actual issues of the case and provides no reliable insight as to their appropriate resolution;
(5) their continuing attempts to overturn the repatriation of the child;
(6) their conduct when they have been allowed contact with the child has undermined the father-son relationship; and
(7) the conditions which the father placed on their visitation with the child were reasonable.
The court denies the father's motion to seal the record, finding that he has not presented sufficient justification for doing so.
I will post more about the decision once I've had an opportunity to review it.
All previous posts about the Sean Goldman abduction case may be read here: