June 2019 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

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

            Following termination of the rights of their biological parents, the Iowa Department of Human Services (DHS) removed E.L. and W.L. from their pre-adoptive placement with intervenors Craig and his husband, Dwight.  The intervenors challenge the denial of their motion to remove the DHS as the children’s guardian, arguing the DHS acted unreasonably and not in the children’s best interests by removing the children from their home over concerns about inadequate supervision.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the juvenile court’s conclusion disrupting the children’s current pre-adoptive placement would not be in their best interests, even if the DHS acted unreasonably at the time of the removal.  Accordingly, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Kevin Parker, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother challenges the termination of her parental rights to three children, raising three claims: (1) termination is not in the children’s best interests under Iowa Code section 232.116(2) (2018); (2) the juvenile court should have declined to terminate under section 232.116(3) because of the closeness of the parent-child relationship and because the children were placed with relatives; and (3) the Iowa Department of Human Services (DHS) did not provide reasonable reunification services because of the high level of turnover among the caseworkers assigned to her family.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we conclude termination is in the children’s best interests, the closeness of the parent-child bond does not outweigh termination, the children were not in the legal custody of relatives, and the mother failed to preserve error on her reasonable-efforts argument relating to caseworker turnover, we affirm the juvenile court’s termination of her parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marion County, Steven Guiter, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (3 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the statutory grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Brendan Greiner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the juvenile court decision terminating their parental rights.  They independently claim the evidence was insufficient to support termination, the court should have granted additional time for them to resolve their issues, and exceptions to termination apply.  OPINION HOLDS: We find sufficient evidence supports the termination, additional time is not warranted, and no exceptions preclude termination.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Joseph Seidlin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the order terminating his parental rights to one child.  He contends the State did not prove statutory grounds for termination, reasonable efforts to reunify, or that termination is in the child’s best interests.  He also alleges the court should have denied the petition based on the closeness of the parent-child relationship.  In the alternative, he asks to delay permanency for six months.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the conclusions of the juvenile court—the father admitted he was not in a position to resume care of the child, and his remaining arguments fail.  We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clay County, Andrew Smith, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (4 pages)

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

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Colin J. Witt, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Potterfield and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (5 pages)

            The parents of two minor children separately appeal the termination of their parental rights, arguing the State failed to prove the grounds for removal cited by the district court and termination was not in the children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we affirm the district court’s termination of the mother’s parental rights to the two children, as well as the termination of the father’s parental rights to the older child.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Scott D. Strait, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (7 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.  We find the services provided by the State were reasonable under the circumstances of the case.  Also, we find termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests.  We affirm the juvenile court’s decision terminating the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David F. Staudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Doyle and May, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, P.J.  (6 pages)

            The mother appeals the juvenile court order terminating parental rights to her child, and the denial of her motion for new trial.  The juvenile court terminated the mother’s rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e) and (h) (2018) in March 2019.  OPINION HOLDS: After reviewing the record, we conclude that termination of parental rights is in the child’s best interest.  We also hold that the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in denying the mother’s motion for new trial.  We affirm the juvenile court’s decision terminating the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Phillip J. Tabor, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Doyle and May, JJ.  Tabor, J., takes no part.  Opinion by May, J.  (9 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude termination was proper under Iowa law and consistent with the child’s best interests.  We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Christine Dalton, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Doyle and May, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, P.J.  (6 pages)

            The father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child, C.G., born in June 2016.  The juvenile court terminated the father’s parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(d) and (h) (2018).  He maintains the State failed to prove the statutory grounds by clear and convincing evidence, termination is not in the child’s best interests, and a permissive factor weighs against severing the parent-child relationship.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the statutory grounds for termination have been proved by clear and convincing evidence, termination is in C.G.’s best interests, and no permissive factor weighs against severing the parent-child relationship, we affirm.