June 2025 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (11 pages)

            The biological parents separately appeal from an order terminating their parental rights.  The father challenges the statutory ground relied on by the district court.  And both parents contend termination is not in the child’s best interests, the district court should have granted additional time for reunification efforts, and their respective bonds with the child should preclude termination.  The mother also challenges the reasonable efforts finding by the district court.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Christine Dalton, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (4 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, asking us to apply a permissive exception to termination.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother failed to preserve error, we affirm the termination of her parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jones County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother and father both appeal the termination of their parental rights to their daughter, arguing that the State failed to prove a ground for termination, termination is not in the best interest of the daughter, and that the juvenile court should have granted them additional time to work towards reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The State proved the statutory ground for terminating the mother’s and father’s parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2024) because the daughter could not be returned to either parent’s care at the time of the termination hearing.  And termination of the mother’s and father’s parental rights is in the best interest of the daughter because of the safety concerns that are still present and the parents’ failure to address their mental-health concerns.  What’s more, the daughter is doing well in her current foster care placement and is bonded with her foster mom.  Additional time for reunification is not appropriate here as the daughter deserves permanency now.  We thus affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Paul G. Crawford, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to a seven-year-old son.  She contends the State failed to prove the statutory ground for termination and that the juvenile court erred in denying her motion for active efforts, asserting her child is an Indian child under the Iowa Indian Child Welfare Act.  OPINION HOLDS: We find sufficient proof that returning the child would expose him to adjudicatory harm.  And the record does not show that the child is an Indian child, so we affirm.