September 2022 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, Jennifer A. Benson Bahr, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to a child born in 2013.  She contends: (I) the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the district court; (II) termination was not in the child’s best interests; (III) the district court should have declined to terminate her parental rights based on her bond with the child; and (IV) she should have been afforded additional time to reunify with the child.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm termination of the mother’s parental rights to the child.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude termination of the father’s parental rights is in the child’s best interests.  We determine there is clear and convincing evidence in the record to support termination of the mother’s parental rights, the mother waived her claim concerning reasonable efforts, and she did not preserve error on her request for an extension of time.  We affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wright County, Joseph L. Tofilon, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (4 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to three children, contending the district court should have afforded her “another six months for reunification” and termination was not in the children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

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

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights, claiming the State did not provide reasonable efforts to reunite the family.  She also argues termination was not in the best interest of the child.  OPINION HOLDS:  We find the mother’s reasonable efforts argument to be unpreserved and determine that termination is in the child’s best interest.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Tabor and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (11 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights.  He contends the State failed to present clear and convincing evidence of the statutory grounds for termination, it is not in A.C.’s best interests to terminate his rights, and the juvenile court should have determined the statutory permissive factors precluded termination.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the findings of the juvenile court.  Because A.C.’s therapist discourages any contact with her father until he acknowledges he sexually abused her, we find the statutory grounds were satisfied.  It is in A.C.’s best interests to terminate her parental relationship with Joshua.  And no permissive factor prevents termination.  So we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Tabor and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, Steven J. Holwerda, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (6 pages)

            C.W. appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children.  OPINION HOLDS: The mother does not contest the elements to at least one statutory ground for termination for each child.  Because we find termination in the children’s best interests and no exception should be applied, we affirm termination of the mother’s parental rights to these children.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hancock County, Karen Kaufman Salic, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON MOTHER’S APPEAL; REVERSED AND REMANDED ON POTENTIAL FATHER’S APPEAL.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (9 pages)

            The mother and the potential biological father, K.A., appeal the termination of their parental rights to L.F., who was born in late 2021.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we cannot say the mother will be able to parent L.F. if given an additional six months and termination of her rights is in the child’s best interests, we affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.  However, the failure of the Iowa Department of Human Services to comply with a court order to paternity test K.A., combined with the department’s failure to provide him any other family centered services (except the offer of visits) constitutes a failure to make reasonable efforts.  We reverse the termination of K.A.’s possible parental rights and remand for paternity testing and, if he is confirmed as L.F.’s biological father, additional services.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her two children.  OPINION HOLDS: The record established that the children could not be safely returned to the mother’s care, so the statutory ground authorizing termination is satisfied.  The parent-child bonds are not strong enough to preclude termination, which is in the children’s best interests.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Benton County, Cynthia S. Finley, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights, arguing the State failed to prove the grounds for termination and that the strength of the bond between him and the child outweighs the need for termination.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the State established the grounds for termination and the strength of the bond between the father and the child does not outweigh the need for termination, we affirm the juvenile court’s termination of the father’s parental rights. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for O'Brien County, Shawna L. Ditsworth, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the review order in a child-in-need-of-assistance proceeding and the ruling on her motion for reasonable efforts.  She requests more frequent and longer visits.  OPINION HOLDS: Following the review hearing, the juvenile court rejected the mother’s reasonable efforts challenge and left the details of visitation, including frequency, length, and supervision, to the Department of Health and Human Services.  On our de novo review, we agree that despite recent progress, the mother’s lack of accountability for her physical and emotional abuse of the children means her interactions should remain at the discretion of the department.  We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child.  OPINION HOLDS: The State proved the grounds for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2022), and termination is in the child’s best interests.  Because delaying permanency would not eliminate the need for the child’s removal, we decline to grant the mother additional time for reunification under section 232.104(2)(b).