DeSantis v. Pegues

35 A.3d 152 (2011)

From our private database of 47,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

DeSantis v. Pegues

Vermont Supreme Court
35 A.3d 152 (2011)

Facts

Spouses Anna DeSantis (defendant) and John Pegues (plaintiff) had an adopted daughter. Pegues and the daughter regularly engaged in physical play involving tickling, belly kisses, face kisses, and climbing on Pegues. As the daughter grew older, DeSantis became concerned that such interactions were inappropriate. Shortly before the spouses separated, Pegues began drinking heavily, and DeSantis regularly found him sleeping in the daughter’s room, once with his hand on the daughter’s bare bottom. After the separation, the daughter continued to live with DeSantis, and Pegues moved into a condominium. The spouses developed an informal visitation schedule for Pegues to see the daughter, although there were no overnight visits because of DeSantis’s concerns about Pegues’s drinking. The daughter referred to her room in Pegues’s condominium as the secret closet and told DeSantis that she and Pegues played kissing and tickling games there, including a game that involved both parties removing their clothes. DeSantis reported Pegues to New York State Child Protective Services, which investigated. The daughter did not report any instances of sexual assault to investigators. However, a social worker hired by DeSantis claimed that the daughter disclosed sexual abuse during their first clinical session. Pegues was charged with felony aggravated sexual assault. While the charge was pending, Pegues voluntarily consented to an interim suspension order that precluded contact with the daughter. Eighteen months later, the state dismissed the charge against Pegues, prompting him to file a motion to dissolve the interim suspension order and reestablish visitation. The family court concluded that the evidence did not support a finding of sexual abuse under the clear-and-convincing-evidence standard but did support a finding of sexual abuse under the lower preponderance-of-the-evidence standard. The court therefore denied Pegues’s motion, stating that visitation would be against the daughter’s best interests at that time. Pegues appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Skoglund, J.)

Concurrence (Johnson, J.)

Dissent (Spur, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 899,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 47,000 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership