Filed May 01, 2019
View Opinion No. 18-1926
View Summary for Case No. 18-1926
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Fae Hoover Grinde, Judge. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED. Considered by Doyle, P.J., Mullins, J., and Carr, S.J. Opinion by Carr, S.J. (5 pages)
Kabra Grabill appeals from the child visitation provisions of her decree with Tyler Swift. She asserts the district court should have granted her additional visitation with their child, K.S. OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court should not have granted Swift discretion to decide visitation with Grabill. Therefore, we reverse that part of the order and remand for entry of an order for definite visitation with Grabill.
Filed May 01, 2019
View Opinion No. 18-2045
View Summary for Case No. 18-2045
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED. Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Doyle, JJ. Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J. (6 pages)
The State appeals an order in a child-in-need-of-assistance proceeding returning custody of a child to her mother and scheduling the return of a second child within forty-five days of the order, arguing (1) both children would be subject to harm if returned and (2) the juvenile court should have changed the permanency goal to termination of the mother’s parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the juvenile court’s order in all respects except that we reverse that portion of the order requiring immediate reunification of the youngest child with the mother and reunification of the second child with the mother within forty-five days. We remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Filed May 01, 2019
View Opinion No. 19-0154
View Summary for Case No. 19-0154
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clay County, Andrew Smith, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART. Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Mullins, JJ. Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J. (7 pages)
A mother appeals removal and adjudication orders involving her child, raising claims that the district court erroneously required participation in pre-adjudication services and improperly relied on her refusal to take a drug test in adjudicating the child in need of assistance. She also asserts the statutory grounds for adjudication cited by the district court were not satisfied. OPINION HOLDS: The district court acted appropriately in basing the temporary removal order on the mother’s refusal to take the test requested by the child protection worker. The court also cited other factors to support adjudication of the child as a child in need of assistance. For that reason, the court’s reliance on the compelled drug-testing portion of the removal order does not require reversal of the adjudicatory order. As for the statutory grounds cited in support of adjudication, we reverse the adjudication under Iowa Code section 232.2(6)(b) (2018) and affirm the adjudication under section 232.2(6)(c)(2) and section 232.2(6)(n).
Filed May 01, 2019
View Opinion No. 19-0196
View Summary for Case No. 19-0196
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Charles D. Fagan, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Doyle, JJ. Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J. (6 pages)
Parents separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their two minor children, challenging the grounds of the district court’s decision and arguing that termination was not in the children’s best interests. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of parental rights to the children.
Filed May 01, 2019
View Opinion No. 19-0203
View Summary for Case No. 19-0203
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Phillip J. Tabor, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ. Tabor, J., takes no part. Opinion by Mullins, J. (3 pages)
A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his two minor children. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights.
Filed May 01, 2019
View Opinion No. 19-0233
View Summary for Case No. 19-0233
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Daniel L. Block, Associate Juvenile Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Tabor, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, J. (7 pages)
A mother and father separately appeal the order terminating their parental rights to one child. The mother contends there was not clear and convincing evidence to support the statutory grounds for termination. Both parents assert the court should have established a guardianship in the child’s current placement rather than terminate their rights. OPINION HOLDS: The mother has waived the statutory-grounds argument by not citing the ground she challenges. But even if she had not waived her challenge, we find termination appropriate under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2018). Further, a guardianship is not in the child’s best interests. We affirm termination as to both appeals.
Filed May 01, 2019
View Opinion No. 19-0245
View Summary for Case No. 19-0245
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Greene County, William C. Ostlund, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Potterfield, P.J., Doyle, J., and Danilson, S.J. Opinion by Danilson, S.J. (3 pages)
A father appeals the termination of his parental rights, claiming grounds for termination have not been proved. OPINION HOLDS: There is clear and convincing evidence to support termination of the father’s parental rights and an extension of time is not warranted. We therefore affirm.
Filed May 01, 2019
View Opinion No. 19-0282
View Summary for Case No. 19-0282
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Adam D. Sauer, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Tabor and Bower, JJ. Opinion by Bower, J. (11 pages)
A mother appeals the juvenile court order terminating her parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: We find reasonable efforts were made to reunify the family and the child could not be safely returned to the mother’s care even with additional services and time. We affirm the termination of her parental rights.
Filed May 01, 2019
View Opinion No. 19-0323
View Summary for Case No. 19-0323
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Kurt J. Stoebe, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ. Opinion by Bower, J. (8 pages)
A mother appeals the juvenile court order terminating her parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: We find there is sufficient evidence in the record to support termination of the mother’s parental rights. It is not in the children’s best interests to give the mother additional time to work on reunification. Termination of the mother’s rights is in the children’s best interests. Although the father’s rights could not be terminated at the time of the termination hearing because he had not received adequate notice, the court could proceed with termination of the mother’s rights. We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.
Filed May 01, 2019
View Opinion No. 19-0372
View Summary for Case No. 19-0372
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Jason A. Burns, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Tabor, J., and Scott, S.J. Opinion by Scott, S.J. (17 pages)
Parents separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their respective children. The father argues the Iowa Department of Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts to facilitate reunification and termination is not in his child’s best interests because a guardianship could have been established in the paternal grandmother. The mother challenges the sufficiency of the evidence underlying the grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court, argues termination is not in the children’s best interests due to the parent-child bond, and maintains she should have been granted additional time to work toward reunification. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of both parents’ parental rights.