Skip to main content
Iowa Judicial Branch
Main Content

Case No. 21-0324

In re the Interest of Z.K., Minor Child

The father seeks further review after the court of appeals affirmed the termination of his parental rights. The father argues the court of appeals erred in finding the Indian Child Welfare Act did not apply to the minor child.


Z.K., Father-Appellant

J.K., Mother-Appellant

Attorney for Appellant Father

Dean A. Fankhauser

Attorney for Appellant Mother

Teresa Ann O'Brien

Attorney for Appellee State

Ellen Ramsey-Kacena

Guardian ad Litem

Michelle M. Hynes

Supreme Court

Oral Argument Schedule


Dec 14, 2021 9:00 AM

Supreme Court Opinion

Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Apr 08, 2022

Court of Appeals

Court of Appeals Opinion

Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Jun 16, 2021

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Mary Jane Sokolovske, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J. and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.,  Opinion by Ahlers, J., Dissent by Tabor, J.  (13 pages)

            The mother and the father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the record at the time of the termination hearing does not show the Indian Child Welfare Act applies to this proceeding.  Furthermore, the parents failed to present a reviewable issue arising from their claims of progress, and the parents waived any claim for additional or alternative services.  Therefore, we affirm the termination of both parents’ parental rights.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that the juvenile court correctly concluded Z.K. is not an Indian child protected under the Indian Child Welfare Act. 

Other Information

Date Retained:
Aug 26, 2021
© 2023 Iowa Judicial Branch. All Rights Reserved.