2018 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Washington County, Daniel P. Kitchen, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, P.J.  (10 pages)

            The mother challenges the continued removal of two of her children from her care following the modification of a dispositional order.  The mother maintains the State (1) failed to prove by substantial evidence that imminent risk, which warranted emergency removal of the children from her care, existed and (2) did not prove a material and substantial change in circumstances warranting a change in disposition.  OPINION HOLDS: Insofar as the mother challenges the emergency removal order, the issue is moot, and we do not consider it.  The mother’s challenge to the change in disposition fails, as the State proved a material and substantial change in circumstances.  The mother does not otherwise challenge the modification of the dispositional order, so we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Danilson, C.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals from the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there is clear and convincing evidence supporting termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2018) and termination is the child’s best interests, we affirm.

           Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Barbara H. Liesveld, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Doyle, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J. (6 pages)

           A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: As to the mother, we find the statutory grounds for termination are met, the best interests of the children and her parent-child bond do not preclude termination, and she should not receive additional time to pursue reunification.  We also find the father’s parent-child bond does not preclude termination. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jefferson County, Williams S. Owens, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (11 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her son, arguing the juvenile court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the proceedings under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children required the Iowa juvenile court to retain jurisdiction, and Iowa is not an inconvenient forum, we affirm

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Guthrie County, Virginia Cobb, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her two minor children.  OPINION HOLDS:  Because there was sufficient evidence to terminate the mother’s parental rights and placement with the mother was not in the best interests of the children, we decline to apply any exception to termination and affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sioux County, Brian L. Michaelson, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Danilson, C.J.  (10 pages)

            A father and a mother separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence supports termination of each parent’s parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2018).  We conclude E.S. cannot be returned to the care of the parents safely because they have not engaged in any meaningful services addressing the risks of physical abuse in the home.  We cannot say the need for removal of the child will no longer exist in six months and, thus, we agree with the juvenile court an extension was not warranted.  The child’s best interests lie in termination of parental rights and permanency with the pre-adoptive foster family. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Madison County, Kevin A. Parker, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (4 pages)

            The father of a child who was adjudicated in need of assistance appeals an order granting the district court concurrent jurisdiction to proceed with a guardianship action.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we are convinced the juvenile court’s grant of concurrent jurisdiction was appropriate.  The concurrent-jurisdiction order is affirmed.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Craig M. Dreismeier, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her minor child, born in 2017.  On appeal, the mother argues the State failed to prove the statutory grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence and termination is not in the best interests of the child because it would be detrimental to the child’s mental and emotional wellbeing.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we agree with the conclusions of the juvenile court and affirm the termination order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Jason A. Burns, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Vogel, J.  (8 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to M.A., born January 2015.  She argues the State failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that grounds for termination exist under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(g) or (h) (2017), termination is not in the best interests of the child, and the strong bond between her and her child precludes termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(3).  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the State proved by clear and convincing evidence the grounds for termination of the mother’s parental rights.  Additionally, we find termination is in the best interests of the child and any bond between the mother and M.A. does not preclude termination.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Adam Sauer, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The parents failed to preserve error on their reasonable-efforts claims.  We find the statutory grounds for termination were established by clear and convincing evidence.  We decline to grant either parent an extension and affirm the termination of the mother’s and father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David F. Staudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Vogel, J.  (9 pages)

            The mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their minor children: A.M., born 2011; A.M., born 2012; E.M., born 2014; and I.M., born 2016.  The father argues the children were not removed for the statutorily required time.  Both argue additional time should have been afforded and termination was not in the best interests of the children.  OPINIONS HOLDS: We conclude the State proved by clear and convincing evidence the grounds for termination of both the mother’s and father’s parental rights.  Additionally, we find termination is in the best interests of the children and neither any bond between the parents and the children nor the children’s placement with relatives is sufficient to preclude termination.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Angela L. Doyle, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals from the termination of her parental rights to her child.  OPINION HOLDS: The statutory grounds authorizing termination were satisfied, authorizing termination, and termination is in the child’s best interest.  The Iowa Department of Human Services made reasonable efforts toward reunification and an additional six months to work toward reunification is not appropriate because the circumstances requiring removal are likely to remain.