February 2021 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Madison County, Kevin Parker, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., and May and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights in a private termination proceeding.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude termination was proper under Iowa Code section 600A.8(3) (2019) and consistent with the child’s best interest.  So we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David F. Staudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by May, P.J., Greer, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (5 pages)

            The mother appeals from the dispositional order that affirmed her child was in need of assistance.  OPINION HOLDS: The mother has not preserved her procedural and ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims for our review, and continued placement of the child with her maternal grandmother is in the child’s best interests.  Therefore, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Deborah Farmer Minot, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by May, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ..  Opinion by Greer, J.  (5 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her children A.P., K.P, A.P., and K.J.  She argues the juvenile court should have given her additional time to work toward reunification and termination would be detrimental to the children to disrupt their bond with her.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to her four children. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, Jennifer Bahr, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by May, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the statutory grounds relied on by the district court for termination of his parental rights, the best interest finding, and the denial of an extension of time for reunification efforts.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review, we affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2020), find termination is in the children’s best interest, and an extension of time, under the facts of this case, is not warranted.  Accordingly, we affirm the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lynn Poschner, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON ALL THREE APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (15 pages)

            The mother of all seven children and the two biological fathers of the six youngest children appeal the juvenile court’s order terminating their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: After our de novo review, we determine the children cannot be returned to the care of any parent at this time, an additional six months is not warranted for any parent, termination is in the children’s best interests, and two children’s objection to terminating their father’s parental rights does not preclude termination.  Therefore, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (12 pages)

            The mother appeals seeking a reversal of the juvenile court order adjudicating her child, A.W., a child in need of assistance (CINA) under Iowa Code section 232.6(c)(2) and (n) (2020).    Alternatively, the mother seeks reversal of a portion of the dispositional order that continued removal of A.W. from her care.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the CINA adjudication under 232.6(c)(2).  Clear and convincing evidence demonstrates A.W. is imminently likely to suffer harmful effects as a result of the mother and father’s toxic relationship and history of domestic violence.  We reverse the CINA adjudication under section 232.2(6)(n).  The State has failed to show by clear and convincing evidence how the mother’s drug or alcohol abuse led to A.W. not receiving adequate care.  Lastly, we affirm the juvenile court order continuing removal of A.W. from the mother’s care.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (4 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child.  He contends (1) the district court should have afforded him six additional months to work toward reunification and (2) termination was not in the child’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights to his child.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Paul G. Crawford, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The mother was provided with reasonable efforts toward reunification, and termination is in the children’s best interests.  Therefore, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Stephen C. Clarke, Judge.  AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., Greer, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (9 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to a thirteen-year-old son.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.  There is clear and convincing evidence the child could not be returned to the father’s care as they have no relationship and the father failed to establish a relationship by writing letters as suggested by the child’s therapist.  The department of human services made reasonable efforts to work toward reunification.  The best interests of the child compel termination.  And termination should not be delayed because the child is in the custody of relatives. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Mark F. Schlenker, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (9 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court order terminating her parental rights to her two minor children.  On appeal, the mother argues: (1) the State did not meet its burden to show the children could not be returned to her care at the time of the termination hearing; (2) the juvenile court erred by refusing to grant her request for a six-month extension to work toward reunification; (3) termination is not in the children’s best interest; and (4) the juvenile court erred by terminating the mother’s parental rights because the children have been placed with a relative.  OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence supports the determination that the children could not be returned to the mother’s care at the time of the termination hearing.  We cannot discern any basis for believing the need for removal will no longer exist after another six months.  Termination is in the children’s best interest.  We find the mother has not met her burden to show relative placement should preclude termination.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clarke County, Monty D. Franklin, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, P.J.  (3 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his children.  OPINION HOLDS: Considering the father’s ongoing substance-use issues and limited contact with the children, termination of his parental rights is in the children’s best interests. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Crawford County, Mary L. Timko, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child.  OPINION HOLDS: The State proved the grounds for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2020).  The father’s inaction in the year following the child-in-need-of-assistance adjudication prevents the child from being placed in his care without risk of further harm.  The father failed to challenge the sufficiency of the State’s efforts at reunification to the juvenile court before the termination hearing and thus failed to preserve the issue for our review.