(a) Except as provided in subsection (d) of this section, any parent who has been removed as the guardian of the person of a minor may apply to the Probate Court which removed him or her for reinstatement as the guardian of the person of the minor, if in his or her opinion the factors which resulted in removal have been resolved satisfactorily.
(b) In the case of a parent who seeks reinstatement, the court shall hold a hearing following notice to the guardian, to the parent or parents and to the minor, if over twelve years of age, by first class mail not less than ten days before the date of the hearing. If the court determines that the factors which resulted in the removal of the parent have been resolved satisfactorily, the court may remove the guardian and reinstate the parent as guardian of the person of the minor, if it determines that it is in the best interests of the minor to do so. At the request of a parent, guardian, counsel or guardian ad litem representing one of the parties, filed within thirty days of the decree, the court shall make findings of fact to support its conclusions.
(c) The provisions of this section shall also apply to the reinstatement of any guardian of the person of a minor other than a parent.
(d) Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, and subject to the provisions of subsection (b) of section 45a-616a, a parent who has been removed as guardian of the person of a minor may not petition for reinstatement as guardian if a court has established a permanent guardianship for the person of the minor pursuant to section 45a-616a.
(P.A. 79-460, S. 15; P.A. 92-118, S. 5; June 12 Sp. Sess. P.A. 12-1, S. 276; P.A. 18-45, S. 9.)
History: Sec. 45-44d transferred to Sec. 45a-611 in 1991; P.A. 92-118 amended Subsec. (b) to require notification of minors over the age of 12 where previously the applicable age was 14; June 12 Sp. Sess. P.A. 12-1 amended Subsec. (a) to add exception re Subsec. (d) and added Subsec. (d) re when parent who has been removed as guardian may not petition for reinstatement as guardian; P.A. 18-45 amended Subsec. (b) by replacing “as provided in section 45a-609” with “by first class mail not less than ten days before the date of the hearing”, and made a technical change.
Annotation to former section 45-44d:
Cited. 193 C. 393.
Annotation to present section:
Under section, once a parent demonstrates that the factors that resulted in the removal of the parent as guardian have been resolved satisfactorily, the parent is entitled to a presumption that reinstatement of guardianship rights is in the best interests of the child and the party opposing reinstatement must rebut this presumption by clear and convincing evidence. 336 C. 272.
A parent who has demonstrated that the reasons that led to the removal of that parent's guardianship rights have been resolved satisfactorily is constitutionally entitled to a presumption that reinstatement is in the best interests of the child, and this presumption applies when the current guardian is a nonparent, but does not apply in a dispute between two parents, and a nonparent must rebut this presumption by clear and convincing evidence. 213 CA 858.
Subsec. (b):
Trial court improperly expanded scope of hearing to address substantive issues without providing prior notice to respondent, in violation of her right to due process. 290 C. 371.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
14
cases (
5 in the last 5 years), 1997–2025 · leading case:
In Re DeLeon J., 963 A.2d 53 (Conn. 2009).
In Re DeLeon J., 963 A.2d 53 (Conn. 2009).
· cites it 9× “3 *374 On August 2, 2007, the respondent filed a petition for reinstatement as the child’s guardian, pursuant to General Statutes § 45a-611 (a) 4 and Practice Book § 35a-20.”
Fish v. Fish, 939 A.2d 1040 (Conn. 2008).
· cites it 4× “See General Statutes § 45a-611. A third party seeking custody via a guardianship petition must fall within a limited class of persons granted standing; General Statutes § 45a-614; and must prove harm akin to that required under the neglect statute.”
In re Zakai F., 198 A.3d 135 (Conn. App. Ct. 2018).
· cites it 12× “The court found that, despite the fact that there had never been a judicial adjudication of neglect or abuse of Zakai, reinstatement of the respondent's guardianship rights pursuant to General Statutes § 45a-611 (b) was not in Zakai's best interest.”
In re Michelle G., 727 A.2d 226 (Conn. App. Ct. 1999).
· cites it 10× “as required by General Statutes § 45a-611. 1 The following facts and procedural history are relevant to this appeal.”
In re Helen B., 719 A.2d 907 (Conn. App. Ct. 1998).
· cites it 2× “Moreover, General Statutes § 45a-611 provides for the reinstatement of a parent as guardian of the person of a minor, if appropriate.”
In re Zakai F., 336 Conn. 272 (Conn. 2020).
· cites it 23× “See General Statutes § 45a-611 (b). To the extent that the child’s interest in safety is implicated, we note that the Supreme Court of Nebraska has explained that applying a heightened standard of proof in reinstatement of guardianship proceedings will actually promote the…”
In re Michael A., 703 A.2d 1146 (Conn. App. Ct. 1997).
“Section 45a-611 provides a mechanism for reinstatement of guardianship.”
In re Zakai F., 198 A.3d 584 (Conn. 2018).
· cites it 2× “3d 135 (2018), is granted, limited to the following issue: "When a parent who has temporarily relinquished custody seeks reinstatement of guardianship rights under General Statutes § 45a-611, is there a constitutional presumption that reinstatement is in the best interests of…”
In Re Brian W., 6 A.3d 136 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010).
· cites it 4× “*792 General Statutes § 45a-611 (a) and (b) 7 provide that, in order to reinstate the parent as guardian, the court must find that the factors that resulted in the removal of the parent have been resolved satisfactorily and that it is in the best interests of the children to do…”
Aldin Assocs. Ltd. P'ship v. State, 230 Conn. App. 223 (Conn. App. Ct. 2025).
· cites it 2× “272 , our Supreme Court decided that ‘‘there is a constitutional presumption that reinstatement of guardianship rights to a parent under General Statutes § 45a-611 is in the best interests of the child .”
In re Zakai F. (Conn. 2021).
· cites it 13× “’’4 I would conclude that the preponderance of the evi- dence standard allows a trial court, when faced with a motion for reinstatement of guardianship under General Statutes § 45a-611,5 to more fairly recognize the rights of the child and to give those rights the appropriate…”
In re Paulo T. (Conn. App. Ct. 2022).
· cites it 9× “General Statutes §§ 45a-611 and 46b-129 (n); Practice Book §§ 35a-20 and 35a-20A; see, e.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.