Grandparents Have General Right to Intervene in Guardianships, But Not in This Case

A Massachusetts appeals court determines that grandparents are part of a class of interested persons who can intervene in guardianship actions but decides that in this particular case a grandfather has no right to intervene in a contentious guardianship because his granddaughter's interests are adequately represented by counsel.  Guardianship of B.V.G. (Mass.App.Ct., No. 14-P-307, April 6, 2015).

B.V.G. has intellectual disabilities, Tourette syndrome and emotional difficulties.  After her parents separated they fought a long custody battle that ended with B.V.G.'s father being awarded custody.  When B.V.G. turned 18, her father petitioned for guardianship and was named as B.V.G.'s temporary guardian.  B.V.G.'s father agreed to let her maternal grandfather send her one email a day, but blocked the emails.  The father admitted that he prevented B.V.G.'s maternal relatives from seeing her, but he argued that it was within his discretion to do so.

In 2013, B.V.G.'s grandfather filed a motion to intervene in the guardianship pursuant to a statute allowing an "interested person" to petition the court to limit a guardian's powers, and asked the court to grant him additional access to his granddaughter.   A probate court judge ruled that the grandfather did not qualify as an interested person because he did not have a financial or tangible interest in B.V.G.'s case.  B.V.G.'s grandfather appealed.

The Appeals Court of Massachusetts upholds the probate court's decision but on different grounds.  The court finds that "[w]hile the definition of 'interested person' does plainly 'include' various categories of people who have a financial stake in a proceeding, the use of the word 'include' -- in the context of this case -- indicates that the list was not intended to be exclusive. . . The definition of 'interested person' itself expressly emphasizes that its meaning will vary depending on the context ‘and shall be determined according to the particular purposes of, and matter involved in, any proceeding.’"  However, the court says that in this case, B.V.G.'s grandfather cannot intervene because it "has no basis for impugning the adequacy of B.V.G.'s current representation, and we therefore conclude that it was well within the judge's purview to deny the motion."

Latest Articles

Nursing Home Arbitration Agreement Held Unenforceable

The Court of Appeals of Arkansas found that an arbitration agreement that did not include the name of the nursing home resident was unenforceable because it did not identify the contractual parties. The court rejected the nursing home's argument that...

READ MORE
Incomplete Beneficiary Designation Form Was Valid

The First Circuit Court of Appeals found that a postal service employee had validly designated his former wife and their children as beneficiaries of his life insurance policy because the designation form was in writing, signed, witnessed, and received by...

READ MORE
ElderLaw Answers

The Academy of Special Needs Planners provides attorneys and financial professionals with the tools they need to develop their special needs planning practices and position themselves as valuable resources for families and organizations.

Questions or Comments? Click here.

©WealthCounsel, LLC 2026

FROM THE KNOWLEDGE BANK

Using Technology to Assist Clients Remotely

State's Medicaid Lien Has Priority Even Though It Was Filed After Recipient Died