## Facts

- In a dissolution action, each parent sought custody of their only child, who had emotional, psychological, and developmental difficulties.
- The maternal grandmother intervened and sought custody.
- The court appointed an attorney for the child at the father’s request and a guardian ad litem (GAL) at the mother’s request.
- After the father left the home, the mother lived with a boarder/boyfriend and planned to marry him.
- The child suffered an injury while in the boyfriend’s care; the mother and boyfriend denied he caused it.
- Multiple mental-health experts supported awarding custody to the grandmother, citing safety concerns if the child remained with the mother and boyfriend.
- The GAL supported custody to the mother; in closing, the child’s attorney supported custody to the grandmother, contrary to the GAL’s position.
- The trial court awarded sole custody to the grandmother and visitation to both parents.

## Issues

1. Whether a minor child’s attorney in a custody dispute may advocate a position contrary to the child’s guardian ad litem.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Connecticut affirmed the judgment upholding the custody award to the grandmother.
- The court held the trial court did not abuse its discretion by permitting the child’s attorney to advocate a custody position contrary to the GAL.
- The court accepted the trial court’s determination that allowing divergent positions could serve the child’s best interests.

## Legal Principles

- The attorney for a minor child and the GAL serve distinct functions in custody litigation.
- A child’s attorney may act as an independent advocate and is not required to defer to the GAL’s recommended outcome.
- Trial courts retain discretion to manage the roles and advocacy of appointed representatives, guided by the child’s best interests.
- Appellate review of such management decisions proceeds under an abuse-of-discretion standard.

## Conclusion

The court held that, in a custody dispute, the trial court may allow a child’s attorney to argue for a custody outcome different from the guardian ad litem’s recommendation when the court determines this approach is consistent with the child’s best interests.


Schult v. Schult, 241 Conn. 767, 699 A.2d 134 (Conn. 1997)