Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
In the INTEREST OF T.H., a child State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. T.H., Child; C.H., Father; and Sharla Price, Guardian ad Litem; Respondents A.S., Mother; Respondent and Appellant
In the Interest of A.H., a child State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. A.H., Child; C.H., Father; and Sharla Price, Guardian ad Litem, Respondents A.S., Mother, Respondent and Appellant
In the Interest of N.S., a child State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. N.S., Child; I.S., Father; and Sharla Price, Guardian ad Litem, Respondents A.S., Mother, Respondent and Appellant
In the Interest of M.S., a child State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. M.S., Child; I.S., Father; and Sharla Price, Guardian ad Litem, Respondents A.S., Mother, Respondent and Appellant
[¶1] A.S., the mother, appealed from juvenile court orders terminating her parental rights to her children, T.H., A.H., N.S., and M.S. The mother argues the juvenile court erred by finding there was clear and convincing evidence the children are in need of protection and the need for protection is likely to continue.
[¶2] The juvenile court found the children are in need of protection and there is clear and convincing evidence the conditions and causes of the need for protection are likely to continue or will not be remedied and for that reason the children are suffering or will probably suffer serious physical, mental, moral, or emotional harm. The juvenile court also found the children had been in foster care for at least 450 out of the previous 660 nights. See N.D.C.C. § 27-20.3-20(1)(c) (stating the court may terminate parental rights if the child is in need of protection and the court finds that the conditions and causes of the need for protection are likely to continue or that the child has been in foster care for at least 450 out of the previous 660 nights). We conclude the court's findings are supported by clear and convincing evidence and are not clearly erroneous. See In re A.L.E., 2018 ND 257, ¶ 4, 920 N.W.2d 461 (stating the elements required for termination of parental rights must be established by clear and convincing evidence and the court's findings are reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard of review). We also conclude the court did not abuse its discretion when it terminated the mother's parental rights. See In re B.H., 2018 ND 178, ¶ 4, 915 N.W.2d 668 (stating the juvenile court has discretion in deciding whether termination of parental rights would promote the children's welfare when the petitioner has met its burden).
[¶3] We summarily affirm the orders under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).
Per Curiam.
[¶4] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Gerald W. VandeWalle Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 20220027, No. 20220028, No. 20220029, No. 20220030
Decided: March 17, 2022
Court: Supreme Court of North Dakota.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)