March 2019 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Barbara H. Liesveld, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., Tabor, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, S.J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there is clear and convincing evidence the child cannot be returned to the mother’s care without risk of harm, the State made reasonable efforts to reunify the mother and child, and no exception weighs against termination, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Christine Dalton Ploof, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Tabor and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother and father appeal the termination of their parental rights to one child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the parents failed to challenge all the statutory grounds for termination, they have waived those issues on appeal.  The father complains about the reasonable efforts of the Department of Human Services (DHS), but we find the DHS met its obligation to make reasonable efforts in this case.  Further, because we determine the child’s best interests are served by termination of their rights, we affirm the juvenile court order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Audubon County, Amy L. Zacharias, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Mullins, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to one child.  She contends the State did not prove the statutory grounds for termination; that termination would be detrimental to D.B. based on their bond; and the department of human services (DHS) failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The State proved the grounds for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2018) because the mother made no progress in her substance abuse or mental health issues leading to the initial removal.  The parent-child bond does not operate to prevent termination here.  We find DHS made reasonable efforts under the circumstances and termination is in the child’s best interests.  We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Gary P. Strausser, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Tabor and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, P.J.  (3 pages)

            The father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child, M.A.  The juvenile court terminated the father’s parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(b), (e), and (h) (2018).  The father argues he should have been given additional time to work toward reunification and termination of his rights is not in M.A.’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: Because an extension of time is not warranted and termination of the father’s parental rights is in M.A.’s best interests, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Appanoose County, William Owens, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Tabor and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (9 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights, arguing the juvenile court should have declined to terminate her rights under the permissive grounds listed in Iowa Code section 232.116(3)(b) (2018) because her teenage daughters objected to termination.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we conclude termination of the mother’s parental rights was proper despite the objection of the children at the termination hearing, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Thomas J. Straka, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Tabor and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (9 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s termination of her parental rights to her two sons, arguing the State failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we conclude the State’s attempts to provide services to further the goal of reunification were reasonable under the circumstances, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clarke County, Monty W. Franklin, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (2 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her minor child.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Romonda Belcher, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Tabor and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, P.J.  (9 pages)

            A mother and father appeal the termination of their parental rights.  Both parents argue the State did not prove the grounds for termination and the district court improperly denied their requests for an additional six months to achieve reunification.  The father additionally argues termination is not in the child’s best interest, the Iowa Department of Human Services (DHS) did not make reasonable efforts toward reunification, and the district court should have placed the child in a guardianship to avoid termination.  OPINION HOLDS: The State proved the grounds for termination as to both parents, as T.A. could not be returned at the time of the termination hearing.  The district court properly denied both parents’ requests for an additional six months to achieve reunification, as neither could show they would be ready to parent at the end of six months.  As to the father, termination is in T.A.’s best interests, DHS made the reasonable decision to decline to hold visitation at the father’s correctional facility, and the district court did not err in declining to place T.A. in a guardianship to preserve the parent-child relationship. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Montgomery County, Amy L. Zacharias, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Doyle, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, born in 2018.  She argues (A) the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the district court; (B) the department of human services failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify her with the child; (C) the district court should not have terminated her parental rights based on the parent-child bond; and (D) the district court should have afforded her additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to the child.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Joseph W. Seidlin, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (5 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child.  OPINION HOLDS: The father failed to preserve his procedural due process claim for our review.  Because clear and convincing evidence supports the finding that the father abandoned or deserted the child, we affirm the termination of his parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(b) (2018).

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Susan F. Flaherty, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., Tabor, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Gamble, S.J.  (9 pages)

            A mother and a father separately appeal from the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we find clear and convincing evidence supports termination of both parents’ rights, and termination and adoption will best provide the children with much needed permanence.  We therefore affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Stephanie Forker Parry, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Tabor and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court order terminating her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the State established by clear and convincing evidence the children could not be returned to the mother, and termination is in the children’s best interests.