Was there another hearing? According to the article (in the first post), the court only ruled that she could appeal the ruling, not that she should be given visitation.
Is this from a newer article? Does this mean that Silvana has been granted a trial to gain access/visitation with Sean? Based on the NJs GVA (info below), I can't imagine she will get anything, however, I'm surprised and shocked that she has gotten as far as she has already.
How can
anything about that woman be in good faith and/or the best interest of Sean? Seriously....
According to family law statute N.J.S.A. 9:2-7.1, grandparents residing in the state have the right to seek an order for visitation rights with their grandchildren. However, in filing an application with the court to establish this visitation, the burden falls upon the grandparent to prove that visitation is in the best interests of the child. The statute lists eight factors for the court to consider in reaching its decision:
1. The relationship between the child and the applicant;
2. The relationship between each of the child’s parents or the person with whom the child is residing and the applicant;
3. The time which has elapsed since the child last had contact with the applicant;
4. The effect that such visitation will have on the relationship between the child and the child’s parents or the person with whom the child is residing;
5. If the parents are divorced or separated, the time sharing arrangement which exists between the parents with regard to the child;
6. The good faith of the applicant in filing the application;
7. Any history of physical, emotional or sexual abuse or neglect by the applicant; and
8. Any other factor relevant to the best interests of the child.
