SUMMARY: The guardian ad litem’s failure to object to the parents’ motion to transfer the case to tribal court, even though he had earlier objected to the tribe’s similar motion, precludes the guardian ad litem from appealing the court’s approval to transfer and that, nevertheless, the burden of good cause to deny transfer would have been on him and not the tribe or parents.
The children of Robert T. and Lynda L. were removed from their home in August 2011. At the Protective Custody Hearing on September 15, 2011, the Oglala Sioux Tribe of the Pine Ridge Reservation was granted approval to intervene and filed a motion to transfer jurisdiction to tribal court. The parents did not object but the Guardian ad Litem (GAL) opposed the transfer and, after the hearing, wrote a letter to the tribal court urging them to decline jurisdiction. The GAL also filed an objection in county court on September 29th and introduced evidence at a hearing on November 1, 2011, that the foster parents and services coordinator lived a distance away from tribal court. DHHS provided testimony from the tribal representative that the tribal court could collective evidence telephonically or could travel to the Grand Island area. At the next hearing on December 12, 2011, the court overruled the tribe’s motion on the basis that an agreement had been reached. The parents then admitted to the allegations and made an oral motion themselves to transfer jurisdiction to the tribal court. The GAL did not specifically object and the court sustained the motion to transfer. The GAL appealed.
The Nebraska Court of Appeals affirmed the court’s decision to transfer jurisdiction because the GAL did not properly object to the parent’s motion to transfer. Although the GAL objected to the tribe’s motion to transfer, that motion was denied and an oral motion by the parents was made. The Court of Appeals noted the two opportunities the GAL was given to object to the new motion and failed to do so. Finally, the Court of Appeals noted that even if they reached the merits that the GAL had the burden to show good cause not to transfer and give the evidence submitted he did not satisfy that burden.