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 V.C., minor child State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. V.C., a child; C.G., her father; and The Director of Roughrider Human Service Zone, Respondents C.A., her mother, Respondent and Appellant
[¶1] C.A. appeals from a district court's judgment terminating her parental rights to daughter, V.C. C.A. argues the district court erred by finding there was clear and convincing evidence the child was in need of protection, and in calculating the number of nights the child was in foster care.
[¶2] The district court considered the requirements of 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), and found there was clear and convincing evidence the child was in need of protection, the conditions and causes of the need for protection were likely to continue or would not be remedied and for that reason the child was suffering or would probably suffer serious physical, mental, moral, or emotional harm, and the child was 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 C.A.’s parental rights. In re J.J.G., 2022 ND 236, ¶ 9, 982 N.W.2d 851 (stating a court has discretion in deciding whether to terminate parental rights).
[¶3] We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).
Per Curiam.
[¶4] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte Douglas A. Bahr
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. 20220381
Decided: February 16, 2023
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)