Facts: Child was born in Honduras, lived with his mother, and had no relationship with his father.

As a teen, local gangs pressured Child to join their ranks. After he resisted, someone fired shots in front of his home. Fearing for his safety, Child left home and traveled to the U.S. He crossed the border in September 2020. Federal authorities placed him with his paternal aunt in Tennessee.

In November, the aunt petitioned the juvenile court to be appointed guardian for her 17-year-old nephew. The petition also requested special findings that would enable Child to apply for special immigrant juvenile status. For example, the petition requested a finding that reunification with Child’s parents was impossible because of abandonment.

The magistrate granted the guardianship but did not make the requested finding, instead finding that reunification was not possible because of Child’s age and the violence in Honduras.

The aunt appealed to the juvenile court judge. Twelve days before Child’s 18^th birthday, the juvenile court judge held a hearing. After Child’s 18^th birthday, the juvenile court entered an order granting the requested guardianship but did not find abandonment as the aunt requested. Instead, the juvenile court judge found that reunification with Child’s parents was not possible because of Child’s age.

The aunt appealed.

The aunt argued the juvenile court erred in not finding that either parent abandoned or neglected Child.

On Appeal: The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court.

Juvenile courts have limited jurisdiction in Tennessee. They share concurrent jurisdiction with circuit and chancery courts to appoint a guardian for a child. In this context, “child” means a person under 18.

The Court found the juvenile court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction once Child turned 18:

[Child] turned 18 before the juvenile court entered the guardianship decree. Only under limited circumstances does a juvenile court retain continuing jurisdiction over a child after the child’s 18^th birthday. None of those circumstances are present here.

The juvenile court had subject-matter jurisdiction to appoint a guardian and issue the special findings when the petition was filed. But the court’s power to appoint a guardian terminated when [Child] turned 18. A juvenile court has no authority under Tennessee law to appoint a guardian for an adult.

*     *     *     *     *

Here, under Tennessee law, the juvenile court lacked the power to appoint a guardian for [Child] after his 18^th birthday.

Because the juvenile court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to appoint a guardian for [Child] after he turned 18, the court’s order was void.

The Court vacated the juvenile court’s order and remanded the case with instructions to dismiss the aunt’s petition.

In re Jose A. (Tennessee Court of Appeals, Middle Section, June 21, 2022).

If you found this helpful, please share it using the buttons below.