2025 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  She challenges the statutory grounds authorizing termination, contends the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification, argues termination is not in the children’s best interests, and requests additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: We reject the mother’s reasonable-efforts challenge and find a statutory ground for termination satisfied because the children cannot be safely returned to the mother’s custody.  Termination is in the children’s best interests, and we do not grant the mother any additional time to work toward reunification.  Accordingly, we affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (5 pages)

            A father appeals termination of his parental rights to a child born in 2024, challenging the statutory ground, arguing termination is not in the child’s best interests, and seeking additional time to achieve reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the statutory elements were proven and termination is in the child’s best interests, and declining to apply a permissive exception, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Fremont County, Scott Strait, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Langholz, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to a child born in December 2021.  OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence shows the mother abandoned or deserted the child as required to terminate parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(b) (2025).  Termination is in the child’s best interests.  Finally, section 232.116(1)(b) does not require reasonable efforts.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Erica Crisp, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Buller, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Parents separately appeal from the termination of their parental rights to two of their children.  Both parents claim the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court, termination is not in the children’s best interests due to the bond they share with the parents, and the court should have permitted a six-month extension to termination proceedings.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm 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 Badding, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, born in 2023, under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(d), (g), and (h) (2025).  She challenges each of the three steps in our termination analysis and alternatively asks for more time to reunify with the child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother failed to contest termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(d), we affirm on that unchallenged ground.  We also find that termination is in the child’s best interests, the mother’s permissive-exception argument is not preserved for our review, and an extension of time is unwarranted. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights.  Both parents claim that the State failed to establish a statutory ground for termination and the juvenile court should have applied a permissive exception to preclude termination based on their respective bonds with their children.  OPINION HOLDS: As to the father, we conclude that his children could not be returned to his custody at the time of the termination hearing, satisfying a ground for termination.  We do not apply a permissive exception to preclude termination of his parental rights.  As to the mother, the children could not be safely returned to her custody at the time of the termination hearing, satisfying a statutory ground for termination of her parental rights.  And we do not apply a permissive exception to preclude termination of her parental rights either.

            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.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Kurt J. Stoebe, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Buller, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Ahlers, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (14 pages)

            Sisters Shelly Zabel and Jacqueline Oberhelman (Jackie) filed competing petitions to be named guardian and conservator of their mother, Mary Zabel, who has advanced dementia.  Following a four-day trial, the district court selected Shelly to be guardian and Green State Credit Union to be the conservator; it suspended a 2012 durable medical power of attorney giving Jackie certain powers.  Jackie appeals, challenging the court’s guardianship decision and the suspension of the power of attorney.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in appointing Shelly guardian rather than Jackie; we affirm that decision.  But the court lacked authority to suspend Mary’s 2012 medical power of attorney naming Jackie as her agent in this circumstance, so we reverse that decision.