Filed Mar 30, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-1681
View Summary for Case No. 21-1681
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Greer, J. (4 pages)
The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights to D.M., born in 2019, under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(b), (e), and (h) (2021). On appeal, the mother focuses her argument on a request for more time, urging the delay would cause no harm to D.M., who is in the care of the child’s father. With more time, the mother argues her involvement in D.M.’s life could be regulated by a bridge order rather than through termination proceedings. OPINION HOLDS: Another extension of time is not appropriate, and applying an exception to save the parent-child relationship is not in D.M.’s best interests. We affirm.
Filed Mar 30, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-1728
View Summary for Case No. 21-1728
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Calhoun County, Joseph McCarville, District Associate Judge. REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Blane, S.J. Opinion by Blane, S.J. (8 pages)
The State appeals the dismissal of CINA petitions on two children. OPINION HOLDS: Because on de novo review we find the State proved the adjudication ground under Iowa Code section 232.2(6)(c)(2) (2021) by clear and convincing evidence, we reverse and remand with directions to enter adjudication orders.
Filed Mar 30, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-1736
View Summary for Case No. 21-1736
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Romonda D. Belcher, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, P.J. (8 pages)
The father appeals the district court order adjudicating E.W. as a child in need of assistance. He contests the sufficiency of the State’s evidence and the admission of hearsay at the adjudication hearing. OPINION HOLDS: Finding clear and convincing proof to support the child-in-need-of-assistance adjudication and no reversible error in the admission of evidence, we affirm.
Filed Mar 30, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-1755
View Summary for Case No. 21-1755
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lynn C.H. Poschner, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., Greer, J., and Doyle, S.J. Opinion by Doyle, S.J. (6 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her children. OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence establishes the grounds for terminating the mother’s parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2021). Because termination is in the children’s best interests and none of the situations listed in section 232.116(3) weigh against termination, we affirm.
Filed Mar 30, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-1817
View Summary for Case No. 21-1817
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marion County, Steven W. Guiter, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, J. (6 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: The State proved a statutory ground for termination and that termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the child’s best interests. Allowing six additional months for reunification would not remedy the issues that gave rise to the child’s removal.
Filed Mar 30, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-1849
View Summary for Case No. 21-1849
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly S. Ayotte, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (5 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child. OPINION HOLDS: Because clear and convincing evidence shows the child cannot be returned to the mother’s care, the State has established the grounds for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2021). Termination is in the child’s best interests, and the child’s placement with a relative does not alter our determination.
Filed Mar 30, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-1860
View Summary for Case No. 21-1860
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winnebago County, Karen Salic, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by May, P.J., and Schumacher and Badding, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (8 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights, claiming the juvenile court should have applied a permissive exception to preclude termination of her parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.
Filed Mar 30, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-1942
View Summary for Case No. 21-1942
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Union County, Monty W. Franklin, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J. (5 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to a child, contending termination “was not in the child’s best interests.” OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the district court that the child’s safety would have been compromised had the child been returned to her mother’s custody. In other words, termination was in the child’s best interests.
Filed Mar 30, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-1962
View Summary for Case No. 21-1962
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Greene County, Joseph B. McCarville, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (7 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: Because the State provided clear and convincing evidence to find that the mother and child could not be reunified at the time of the termination hearing, we affirm the juvenile court’s termination of the mother’s parental rights.
Filed Mar 30, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-1970
View Summary for Case No. 21-1970
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Greer, J. (9 pages)
A father appeals the termination of his parental rights. He argues he should have been granted a six-month extension, the court should have created a guardianship, and that the court should have invoked a statutory exception to termination because the child was in the custody of a family member. OPINION HOLDS: The father did not prove reunification would be possible after an additional six months. A guardianship is not in the child’s best interests. The father did not preserve error on the statutory exception.
Filed Mar 30, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-1972
View Summary for Case No. 21-1972
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Brendan Greiner, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by May, P.J., and Schumacher and Badding, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (10 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to three children. She challenges the grounds for termination, argues termination is contrary to the children’s best interests due to the closeness of the parent-child bonds, additional time would rectify the situation, and a guardianship should have been established in lieu of termination. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s rights.
Filed Mar 30, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-1979
View Summary for Case No. 21-1979
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Osceola County, David C. Larson, District Associate Judge. REVERSED AND REMANDED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, P.J. (8 pages)
The mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights. They allege a denial of due process because they were not given notice of the termination hearing. And they allege a denial of due process because the juvenile court terminated their rights without holding a dispositional hearing. Finally, they contend the court erred in terminating their parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: Because the parents were not given notice of the termination hearing and were denied due process, we vacate the termination order and remand for further proceedings.