2020 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for O'Brien County, Don E. Courtney, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and May, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (6 pages)

            Kimberlin Pettus appeals from the decree dissolving her marriage.  She claims the district court erred in awarding the parties joint physical care of their children, determining child support, and declining to award her attorney fees.  Kimberlin also seeks appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: A joint physical care arrangement is in the children’s best interests.  The district court’s decision determining child support or declining to award Kimberlin attorney fees was not inequitable.  We decline to award her appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Stephanie Forker Parry, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Mahan, S.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to four children, contending the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the decision of the juvenile court to terminate the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Colin J. Witt, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Greer, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, S.J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court decision terminating her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS:  The mother physically abused the children and she does not have the ability to meet their special needs.  We conclude termination of her parental rights is in the children’s best interests.  Also, there is not clear and convincing evidence to show termination of the mother’s rights would be detrimental to the children based on the closeness of the parent-child relationship.  We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winneshiek County, Linnea M.N. Nicol, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother in prison for physically abusing one of her four children appeals an order terminating her parental rights to those four children.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no merit to the claims of error, we affirm the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cherokee County, Mary L. Timko, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., May, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  Partial Dissent by May, J.  (10 pages)

            Pursuant to a 2017 permanency order, R.C. is placed in the custody of his father and resides in a residential care facility for children with special needs.  R.C.’s mother filed motions requesting paternity testing on R.C. and asking for expanded visitation with him.  The juvenile court concluded neither request was in R.C.’s best interests, denied the mother’s motions, and otherwise affirmed the permanency order on review.  OPINION HOLDS: The juvenile court should have ordered paternity testing, so we reverse and remand on this issue.  We otherwise affirm the juvenile court order on permanency review, including the denial of the mother’s request for expanded visitation.  R.C. remains in the custody of the father.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: Because the mother cited no statute in support of her motion for paternity testing, I would not reverse the denial of her motion on statutory grounds.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David F. Staudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Schumacher, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Scott, S.J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the adjudication of his two children as children in need of assistance (CINA).  He also challenges the denial of his request for visitation.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the CINA adjudications and the court’s denial of the father’s initial motion for visitation.  We find no error in the court’s decision to reconsider the issue of visitation at a subsequent review hearing.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Korie Shippee, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Ahlers, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (4 pages)

            The father of R.C. appeals the termination of his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the father has had little to no relationship with R.C. and has been incarcerated most of R.C.’s life, we affirm the juvenile court’s order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sioux County, Daniel P. Vakulskas, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON MOTHER’S APPEAL; REVERSED AND REMANDED ON FATHER’S APPEAL.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., May, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (10 pages)

            The mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their children, W.E. and D.J.  The juvenile court terminated both parents’ rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(d), (e), and (f) (2019).  The father argues his rights were violated because he was not allowed to participate in most of the termination hearing.  Additionally, he claims the juvenile court erred in refusing to admit one of his proposed exhibits, challenges the statutory grounds for termination, and argues termination is not in the children’s best interests.  The mother challenges the statutory grounds for termination, whether termination is in the children’s best interests, and the juvenile court’s refusal to apply a permissive factor to save the parent-child relationship.  Additionally, she argues a six-month extension to achieve reunification is warranted.  OPINION HOLDS: The father’s due process rights were violated when he was not allowed to fully participate in the termination proceedings.  We reverse the termination of the father’s parental rights and remand the case to the juvenile court for additional expedited proceedings in accordance with this opinion.  But we affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights, as statutory grounds for termination were met, termination is in the children’s best interests, no permissive factor weighs against termination, and additional time for reunification is not warranted here.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Christine Dalton, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Doyle, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (9 pages)

            The mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to J.G.  While only the mother asserts the State failed to prove the statutory grounds for termination, both parents assert termination is not in the child’s best interests and the Iowa Department of Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts for reunification.  The father also requested additional time for reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the parental rights of both parents.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Mark Fowler, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Gamble, S.J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The children could not be returned to the father’s care, satisfying the statutory grounds for termination.  Termination is in the children’s best interests, and the bond between the father and children is not strong enough to preclude termination.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Eric J. Nelson, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to a one-year-old child.  OPINION HOLDS: The State showed by clear and convincing evidence the statutory grounds for termination where the parent fails to maintain significant and meaningful contact with the child.  We further determine it was in the child’s best interests to terminate the father’s parental rights and move toward a permanent home.  Finally, the father waived any argument the State failed to make reasonable efforts to reunite him with the child.  We affirm the termination. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, William Owens, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her minor child, arguing the State failed to prove grounds for termination and termination was not in the child’s best interest.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we conclude the State proved grounds for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2019) and that termination was in the child’s best interest.  We affirm the juvenile court termination order.