In the INTEREST OF M.M., a Child Lyndsey Tungseth, L.B.S.W., Cass County Human Service Zone, Petitioner and Appellee v. M.M., a child; M.M., father, Respondents S.M., mother, Respondent and Appellant
In the Interest of R.M., a Child Lyndsey Tungseth, L.B.S.W., Cass County Human Service Zone, Petitioner and Appellee v. M.M., a child; M.M., father, Respondents S.M., mother, Respondent and Appellant
In the Interest of S.M., a Child Lyndsey Tungseth, L.B.S.W., Cass County Human Service Zone, Petitioner and Appellee v. M.M., a child; M.M., father, Respondents S.M., mother, Respondent and Appellant
In the Interest of E.M., a Child Lyndsey Tungseth, L.B.S.W., Cass County Human Service Zone, Petitioner and Appellee v. M.M., a child; M.M., father, Respondents S.M., mother, Respondent and Appellant
In the Interest of K.M., a Child Lyndsey Tungseth, L.B.S.W., Cass County Human Service Zone, Petitioner and Appellee v. M.M., a child; M.M., father, Respondents S.M., mother, Respondent and Appellant
[¶1] S.M., the mother, appeals from a juvenile court order terminating her parental rights to M.M., R.M., S.M., E.M., and K.M. On appeal, S.M. argues the State presented insufficient evidence to support termination of her parental rights. We conclude the State's evidence was sufficient to prove the children are deprived; the conditions and causes of the deprivation are likely to continue; and the children are suffering, or will in the future probably suffer, serious physical, mental, moral, or emotional harm as required for the termination of parental rights under N.D.C.C. § 27-20-44(1)(c). The juvenile court's findings are supported by clear and convincing evidence, are not clearly erroneous, and support the termination of S.M.’s parental rights. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).
Per Curiam.
[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Gerald W. VandeWalle Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte
Was this helpful?