Dejarnette v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.

6 Citing cases

  1. Harris v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs. & Minor Child

    2024 Ark. App. 135 (Ark. Ct. App. 2024)   Cited 2 times

    Pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(ix)(a)(3)(A) &(B), aggravated circumstances means, among other things, that a determination has been made by the circuit court that there is little likelihood that services to the family will result in successful reunification. McLemore v. Ark. Dep't of Hum. Servs., 2018 Ark.App. 57, 540 S.W.3d 730. To prevail on this ground, DHS was required to demonstrate that if appropriate reunification services were provided, there is little likelihood that reunification could be achieved. Dejarnette v. Ark. Dep't of Hum. Servs., 2022 Ark.App. 410, 654 S.W.3d 83. Here, Harris argues that the evidence is insufficient to support the circuit court's aggravated-circumstances finding.

  2. Moore v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.

    2024 Ark. App. 4 (Ark. Ct. App. 2024)   Cited 1 times

    This argument is not preserved for appellate review. Dejarnette v. Ark. Dep't of Hum. Servs., 2022 Ark.App. 410, 654 S.W.3d 83.

  3. Drake v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs. & Minor Children

    2023 Ark. App. 429 (Ark. Ct. App. 2023)   Cited 1 times

    Dejarnette v. Ark. Dep't of Hum. Servs., 2022 Ark.App. 410, at 16, 654 S.W.3d 83, 93. Even if

  4. Sturgeon v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs. & Minor Children

    2023 Ark. App. 337 (Ark. Ct. App. 2023)   Cited 1 times

    We have repeatedly held that evidence of a genuine sibling bond is required to reverse a best-interest finding based on the severance-of-a-sibling-relationship argument. See Price v. Ark. Dep't of Hum. Servs., 2023 Ark.App. 140; Minchew v. Ark. Dep't of Hum. Servs., 2023 Ark.App. 95, 660 S.W.3d 909; Dejarnette v. Ark. Dep't of Hum. Servs., 2022 Ark.App. 410, 654 S.W.3d 83; Martin v. Ark. Dep't of Hum. Servs., 2020 Ark.App. 192, at 6, 596 S.W.3d 98, 102 (holding that keeping siblings together is an important consideration but is not outcome determinative because the best interest of each child is the polestar-and evidence of a genuine sibling bond is required to reverse a best- interest finding based on the severance of a sibling relationship). Because no evidence was presented regarding the bond between the siblings, this argument does not warrant reversal.

  5. Price v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs. & Minor Child

    2023 Ark. App. 140 (Ark. Ct. App. 2023)   Cited 5 times

    This court has held that keeping siblings together is an important consideration but is not outcome determinative because the best interest of each child is the polestar consideration. Dejarnette v. Ark. Dep't of Hum. Servs., 2022 Ark.App. 410, 654 S.W.3d 83.

  6. Lyall v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.

    2023 Ark. App. 81 (Ark. Ct. App. 2023)   Cited 7 times

    Moreover, this court has held that keeping siblings together is an important consideration but is not outcome determinative because the best interest of each child is the polestar consideration. Dejarnette v. Ark. Dep't of Hum. Servs., 2022 Ark.App. 410, 654 S.W.3d 83. Furthermore, evidence of a genuine sibling bond is required to reverse a best-interest finding based on the severance-of-a-sibling-relationship argument.