July 2019 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Allamakee County, Linnea M.N. Nicol, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., Bower, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Gamble, S.J.  (6 pages)

            J.B. appeals the juvenile court’s decision denying his request to intervene in child in need of assistance proceedings.  OPINION HOLDS: J.B. did not preserve error on his claims regarding discovery or the recusal of the judge.  We determine the juvenile court did not err in denying J.B.’s application to intervene.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Charles D. Fagan, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and May, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals a district court order terminating her parental rights to her child, born in 2016.  She contends (1) the record lacks clear and convincing evidence to support the grounds for termination cited by the court; (2) the department of human services did not make reasonable reunification efforts; and (3) termination is not in the child’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to her child.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals a district court order terminating her parental rights to her child, contending the record lacks clear and convincing evidence to support the grounds for termination cited by the court.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the State proved that the child cannot be returned to the mother’s custody as required by Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2018).  We affirm the juvenile court’s termination of her parental rights to the child.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Karen Kaufman Salic, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Doyle and May, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (8 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 interest.  We affirm.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child.  OPINION HOLDS: The State proved the grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence, and termination is in the child’s best interests.  We decline to apply any of the statutory permissive factors to avoid termination, and we deny the mother’s request for a six-month extension. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Cheryl Traum, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Doyle and May, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the district court’s separate orders terminating her parental rights to her three children K.A., K.M., and K.P.  She argues terminating her parental rights is not in the children’s best interest and she should have instead been given additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: On de novo review, we conclude termination of the mother’s parental rights to the children is in their best interest.  The mother has not addressed her substance-abuse issue.  She has also failed to address concerns over mental health, domestic violence, and housing.  There is no evidence termination would be detrimental to the children.  No evidence suggests the mother would be able to correct these issues if given another six months to work toward reunification.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Benton County, Cynthia S. Finley, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Tabor, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Scott, S.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals an order modifying the permanency goal in a child-in-need-of-assistance proceeding.  OPINION HOLDS:  We conclude the modification of the permanency goal to placement with the father is in the best interests of the child and is supported by clear and convincing evidence.  The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in denying the mother’s request to submit written closing arguments.  We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Barbara H. Liesveld, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Potterfield and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (11 pages)

            Foster parents Brad and Bobbi argue the juvenile court should have granted their motion to remove the Iowa Department of Human Services (DHS) as I.P.’s guardian.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we agree with the juvenile court’s conclusion the DHS acted in I.P.’s best interests, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Rose Ann Mefford, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Doyle and May, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (15 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 children’s best interests.  We affirm.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (9 pages)

            A mother and a father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child, A.G.  OPINION HOLDS: Grounds for termination have been shown by clear and convincing evidence.  An extension of time to seek reunification is not warranted, termination of parental rights is in the child’s best interests, and no permissive factor weighs against termination.  We therefore affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Barbara H. Liesveld, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (4 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her two children, raising claims: the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court, termination is not in the children’s best interests, and the juvenile court should have declined to terminate her parental rights because the children were placed with a relative.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to her children.

Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., Bower, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, S.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals a child in need of assistance (CINA) permanency order.  OPINION HOLDS:  We find the juvenile court properly denied the mother’s request to dismiss or modify the permanency order placing the child in the care of the father.  We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.