In re A.W

145 Citing cases

  1. In re J.D.P.

    No. M2007-02695-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Jun. 30, 2008)

    Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113(c)(2); In re F.R.R., 193 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tenn. 2006); In re A.W., 114 S.W.3d 541, 544 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2003); In re C.W.W., 37 S.W.3d 467, 475-76 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2000) (holding a court may terminate a parent's parental rights if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that one of the statutory grounds for termination of parental rights has been established and that the termination of such rights is in the best interests of the child). Therefore, a court may terminate a person's parental rights if (1) the existence of at least one statutory ground is proved by clear and convincing evidence and (2) it is clearly and convincingly established that termination of the parent's rights is in the best interest of the child.

  2. In Matter of S. T. T.

    No. M2007-01609-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 17, 2008)

    Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113(c)(2) (2005); In re F.R.R., III, 193 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tenn. 2006). See In re A.W., 114 S.W.3d 541, 544 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2003); In re C.W.W., 37 S.W.3d 467, 475-76 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2000) (holding a court may terminate a parent's parental rights if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that one of the statutory grounds for termination of parental rights has been established and that the termination of such rights is in the best interests of the child). The elements stated above must be established by clear and convincing evidence.

  3. State v. L. H.

    No. M2007-00170-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 31, 2007)   Cited 3 times

    Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113(c)(2) (2005); In re F.R.R., III, 193 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tenn. 2006). See In re A.W., 114 S.W.3d 541, 544 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2003); In re C.W.W., 37 S.W.3d 467, 475-76 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2000) (holding a court may terminate a parent's parental rights if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that one of the statutory grounds for termination of parental rights has been established and that the termination of such rights is in the best interests of the child). The elements stated above must be established by clear and convincing evidence.

  4. In re A.M.T.

    No. M2003-02926-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Jul. 2, 2004)   Cited 2 times
    Including discussion of last minute efforts in the context of persistent conditions

    Additionally, they must prove that terminating the parent's rights is in the child's best interests. Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113(c)(2); In re A.W., 114 S.W.3d 541, 545 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003); In re M.W.A., Jr., 980 S.W.2d 620, 622 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998). The factors to be considered in a "best interests" analysis are set forth in Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113(i).

  5. In re Azelea B.

    No. M2023-00656-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 16, 2024)   Cited 3 times

    Furthermore, Mother's efforts after the termination petition's filing were "too little, too late" to demonstrate substantial compliance. See, e.g., In re A.W., 114 S.W.3d 541, 544-47 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003) (affirming the trial court's finding that the parent's improvements made since the filing of the termination petition were "'too little, too late.'"). We conclude that the trial court did not err in terminating Mother's parental rights upon clear and convincing evidence of the statutory ground of failure to substantially comply with the reasonable requirements of the permanency plans.

  6. In re Dravyn L.D.

    No. M2009-00357-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 25, 2010)   Cited 1 times

    First, Mother's contention that the failure to timely ratify the plan (or its revisions) rendered the plan "of no force and effect" is unavailing. As DCS correctly notes, we have previously rejected this same argument. SeeIn re A.W., 114 S.W.3d 541, 546 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003); In re T.F., No. W2001-01935-COA-R3-JV, 2005 WL 2002 WL 1751221 (Tenn. Ct. App. W.S., filed Feb. 19, 2002). In holding that a court's untimely ratification does not nullify a permanency plan, we observed:

  7. In re Julian G.

    No. M2009-01440-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 25, 2010)

    Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113(c)(2); In re F.R.R., III, 193 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tenn. 2006). See In re A.W., 114 S.W.3d 541, 544 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003); In re C.W.W., 37 S.W.3d 467, 475-76 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000) (holding a court may terminate a parent's parental rights if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that one of the statutory grounds for termination of parental rights has been established and that the termination of such rights is in the best interests of the child). The elements stated above must be established by clear and convincing evidence.

  8. In re Malichi C.

    No. E2009-00055-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 13, 2009)   Cited 2 times

    Second, they must prove that terminating the biological parent's parental rights is in the child's best interest as described in Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113(I). Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113(c)(2); In re A.W., 114 S.W.3d 541, 545 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003); In re C.W.W., 37 S.W.3d 467, 475-76 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000); In re M.W.A., Jr., 980 S.W.2d 620, 622 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998). No civil action carries with it graver consequences than a petition to sever family ties irretrievably and forever.

  9. In re B. T.

    No. M2008-00946-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 13, 2008)

    Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113(c)(2); In re F.R.R., 193 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tenn. 2006); In re A.W., 114 S.W.3d 541, 544 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2003); In re C.W.W., 37 S.W.3d 467, 475-76 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2000) (holding a court may terminate a parent's parental rights if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that one of the statutory grounds for termination of parental rights has been established and that the termination of such rights is in the best interests of the child). Therefore, a court may terminate a person's parental rights if (1) the existence of at least one statutory ground is proved by clear and convincing evidence and (2) it is clearly and convincingly established that termination of the parent's rights is in the best interest of the child.

  10. In re R.L.F

    278 S.W.3d 305 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 97 times
    Providing that DCS must submit clear and convincing evidence to establish that it expended reasonable efforts in assisting the parent when a termination ground based upon DCS's efforts is implicated

    Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113(c)(2); In re F.R.R., 193 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tenn. 2006); In re AW., 114 S.W.3d 541, 544 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2003); In re C.W.W., 37 S.W.3d 467, 475-76 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2000) (holding a court may terminate a parent's parental rights if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that one of the statutory grounds for termination of parental rights has been established and that the termination of such rights is in the best interests of the child). Therefore, a court may terminate a person's parental rights if (1) the existence of at least one statutory ground is proved by clear and convincing evidence and (2) it is clearly and convincingly established that termination of the parent's rights is in the best interest of the child.