2020 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Zrinyi Wittig, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and May and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (11 pages)

            B.Z. appeals the district court’s ruling appointing her daughter as her guardian and conservator.  She asserts the district court erred in finding her decision-making capacity is so impaired that she is unable to care for her physical and financial health.  In addition, she asserts the district court erred by not considering whether third-party assistance was available to her.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude there is substantial evidence to support the court’s decisions and that the court did not have to address third-party assistance in this circumstance.  For these reasons, we affirm.

            Certiorari to the Iowa District Court for Carroll County, Adria Kester, Judge.  WRIT ANNULLED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (15 pages)

            R. Scott Rhinehart challenges the imposition of a sanction.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in finding Rhinehart violated Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.413 and imposing a $5000 sanction.  We annul the writ.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winneshiek County, Linnea M.N. Nicol, District Associate Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., May, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by May, J.  Dissent by Vogel, S.J.  (13 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the State failed to establish statutory grounds authorizing termination by clear and convincing evidence under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(d) or (f) (2019).  DISSENT ASSERTS: I agree with the juvenile court and would affirm that the grounds for termination under section 232.116(1)(f) were satisfied. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, Jennifer A. Benson, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., May, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Gamble, S.J.  (11 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights to two of their children.  OPINION HOLDS: The State established statutory grounds for termination because the children could not be safely returned to the parents.  Termination is in the children’s best interests.  The parent-child bonds are not strong enough to preclude termination.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, William Owens, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Greer, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (5 pages)

            The father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child, J.S.  The father does not contest the statutory ground for termination.  He maintains termination of his rights is not in J.S.’s best interests and argues he should be given additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The father, who has never been the caretaker of J.S., remained in prison at the time of the termination hearing and did not anticipate being released for at least six months.  Even after being released, he will need time to prove he can maintain sobriety outside of an institutional setting.  For these reasons, termination of his parental rights is in J.S.’s best interests and additional time is not warranted.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winnebago County, Karen Kaufman Salic, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Greer, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, S.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court order terminating her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: There is sufficient evidence in the record to support termination of the mother’s parental rights.  It would not be in the children’s best interests to further extend this case by giving the mother an additional period of time to work on reunification.  We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and May and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (9 pages)

            A father, Antonio, challenges the termination of his parental relationship to K.S.  Antonio has not maintained a significant relationship with K.S., and he is currently incarcerated.  Antonio argues that because the record does not show K.S. is opposed to being reunited with him upon his release from prison, his parental rights should be preserved.  Next, Antonio contends that terminating his parental rights is not in K.S.’s best interests.  Last, Antonio argues that terminating his parental rights is unnecessary because K.S. is in the care of an aunt.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Antonio and K.S. are virtually strangers, it would be unsound to interpret the son’s lack of opposition as an affirmative desire to wait for his father to be available as a parent.  Next, because. K.S. has become integrated into his aunt’s family and has permanency in a safe and nurturing home, we find it in K.S.’s best interest to terminate Antonio’s parental rights.  Last, because legal custody has remained with the DHS and not with the aunt, Iowa Code § 232.116(3)(a) does not apply. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Scott, S.J.  (4 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child, born in 2016, pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2019).  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding the evidence sufficient to support termination, such is in the best interests of the child, and the argued-for exception to termination is inapplicable.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, S.J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the juvenile court decision terminating his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS:  There is clear and convincing evidence in the record to support termination of the father’s parental rights, and termination is in the child’s best interests.  We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lynn Poschner, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (7 pages)

            The mother of C.D. and S.D. and the father of C.D. separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their children.  In his appeal, the father asserts only that his child could be returned to the mother so his rights should not be terminated.  The mother contends the ground for termination is not supported, termination is not in the children’s best interests, there exist exceptions to preclude termination, and there were not reasonable efforts made to reunify the family.  OPINION HOLDS: There is clear and convincing evidence to support termination of both parents’ parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2019).  Reasonable efforts were made, termination is in the children’s best interests, and no exceptions apply to preclude termination.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Adam D. Sauer, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Gamble, S.J.  (4 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The statutory grounds authorizing termination are satisfied, and the mother waived her challenge to the reasonable-efforts mandate by failing to alert the juvenile court of any alleged deficiencies before the termination hearing.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, William Owens, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother and father appeal the termination of their respective parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Termination is in the children’s best interests.  The parents were not entitled to additional time to work toward reunification.  And the juvenile court was correct in declining to establish a guardianship as an alternative to termination.