2022 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Karen Kaufman Salic, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by May, P.J., and Schumacher and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the district court order terminating her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: There is clear and convincing evidence in the record to support termination of the mother’s rights, an extension of time would not be in the child’s best interests, and termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the child’s best interests.  We affirm the decision of the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by May, P.J., and Schumacher and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, contending termination was not in the child’s best interest because of their bond and she should have been granted additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review, we find that termination of the mother’s parental rights was in this child’s best interest despite any bond between them.  The mother failed to show that additional time would eliminate the need for removal.  We therefore affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marion County, Steven Guiter, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Chicchelly, J. and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, S.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her children, contending the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court and termination was not in the best interests of the children.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (8 pages)

            The father appeals the modification of the dispositional order and modification of the permanency goal in child-in-need-of-assistance proceedings.  OPINION HOLDS: The father was unable to maintain sobriety.  The district court properly modified the dispositional order and property modified the permanency goal.  We affirm the decision of the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Guthrie County, Virginia Cobb, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by May, P.J., and Schumacher and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the district court order terminating his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find there is clear and convincing evidence in the record to support termination of the father’s parental rights.  Also, termination of his parental rights is in the child’s best interests.  We affirm the decision of the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Stephen A. Owen, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and May, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (4 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to four children, contending the State failed to prove the children could not be returned to her custody.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of her parental rights to all four children.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Calhoun County, Joseph B. McCarville, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and May, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals juvenile court orders adjudicating her child in need of assistance and removing the child from her home at the time of adjudication and disposition.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the juvenile court’s adjudication and dispositional orders.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Deborah Farmer Minot, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (9 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the State showed the statutory grounds for termination, and the mother failed to show a permissive factor to avoid termination.  The State also showed the department of human services made reasonable efforts toward reunification.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and May, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother and a father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child.  Both parents contend (1) the State failed to prove the grounds for termination; (2) termination was not in the child’s best interests; and (3) the district court should not have ordered termination in light of their bond with the child.  The mother additionally argues the district court “erred in granting the State’s motion for modification of disposition.”  The father additionally asserts the district court should have placed the child in a guardianship with the child’s grandmother.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s thorough order terminating parental rights to this child.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Crawford County, Mary Timko, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The State proved the statutory grounds for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(d) (2021).  Accordingly, termination was proper.

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

            The guardian ad litem (GAL) and intervenor appeal a guardianship decision after the juvenile court terminated Ke.D. and Ki.D.’s parents’ rights.  GAL Paul White and paternal grandmother Carletta asked the court to remove the department of human services (DHS) as the children’s guardian and appoint Carletta guardian.  They assert DHS acted unreasonably, its guardianship is not in the children’s best interests, DHS violated its procedure by removing the children from Carletta and placing them in foster care, and DHS’s guardianship should be terminated.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree DHS acted unreasonably in failing to send relative notices.  But it generally acted in the children’s best interests.  And it is in the children’s best interests for DHS to remain as guardian and custodian.  We affirm the denial of White’s and Carletta’s motions.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I agree the key question is whether removal of the department as guardian is in the children’s best interests.  I believe it is; therefore, I respectfully dissent.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Joseph L. Tofilon, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and May, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (5 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child.  He contends (1) the State failed to prove the ground for termination cited by the district court; (2) the State failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification; and (3) termination was not in the child’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights to the child.