2022 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dickinson County, Shawna L. Ditsworth, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (9 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights.  They both argue (1) the statutory grounds relied upon for termination were not satisfied, in part because the State failed to make reasonable efforts towards reunification; (2) termination is not in the child’s best interests; (3) their respective bonds with the child should preclude termination, and (4) they should be given additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Statutory grounds authorizing termination were satisfied, and the parents’ reasonable-efforts challenges were not preserved.  Termination is in the child’s best interests.  The parent-child bonds are not so strong to preclude termination.  And we decline to award either parent additional time to work toward reunification.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (9 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the grounds for termination have been established, termination is in the children’s best interests, and no permissive exception applies.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Ida County, Mark C. Cord III, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (5 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights, challenging the statutory grounds for termination, the efforts made to reunify him with his child, the denial of his request for more time, and the effectiveness of his attorneys.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the juvenile court’s order terminating the father’s parental rights.

            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.