From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re S.M.F.

Supreme Court of North Dakota
May 16, 2024
2024 N.D. 92 (N.D. 2024)

Opinion

20240097

05-16-2024

In the Interest of S.M.F., a Child v. S.M.F., a/k/a S.M.I., Child; R.F., Father, Respondents and Appellees Grand Forks County Human Service Zone, Petitioner and Appellee and T.I., a/k/a T.G., Mother, Respondent and Appellant

Jacqueline A. Gaddie, Assistant State's Attorney, and Alexander D. Kiser, under the Rule on Limited Practice of Law by Law Students, Grand Forks, ND, for petitioner and appellee; submitted on brief. Tracy E. Reames, Fargo, ND, for respondent and appellant; submitted on brief.


Appeal from the Juvenile Court of Grand Forks County, Northeast Central Judicial District, the Honorable Donald Hager, Judge.

Jacqueline A. Gaddie, Assistant State's Attorney, and Alexander D. Kiser, under the Rule on Limited Practice of Law by Law Students, Grand Forks, ND, for petitioner and appellee; submitted on brief.

Tracy E. Reames, Fargo, ND, for respondent and appellant; submitted on brief.

PER CURIAM.

[¶1] T.I. appeals from a juvenile court order terminating her parental rights to S.M.F. T.I. argues the court erred in finding clear and convincing evidence to establish the conditions and causes of the need for protection were likely to continue and that S.M.F. would likely suffer harm absent termination of T.I.'s parental rights.

[¶2] The juvenile court found S.M.F. to be a child in need of protection and concluded she had been in the human service zone's care, custody, and control for at least 450 out of the previous 660 nights. N.D.C.C. § 27-20.3-20(1)(c)(2). S.M.F. does not challenge this finding. See Interest of B.R., 2023 ND 137, ¶ 2, 993 N.W.2d 509 ("Because the court may terminate parental rights under N.D.C.C. § 27-20.3-20(1)(b), we need not determine whether the court erred in finding the conditions and causes of the need for protection are likely to continue under N.D.C.C. § 27-20.3-20(1)(c)(1)."). After reviewing the record, we conclude the court's findings are supported by clear and convincing evidence, are not clearly erroneous, and the court did not abuse its discretion by terminating the parental rights of T.I. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

[¶3] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte Douglas A. Bahr


Summaries of

In re S.M.F.

Supreme Court of North Dakota
May 16, 2024
2024 N.D. 92 (N.D. 2024)
Case details for

In re S.M.F.

Case Details

Full title:In the Interest of S.M.F., a Child v. S.M.F., a/k/a S.M.I., Child; R.F.…

Court:Supreme Court of North Dakota

Date published: May 16, 2024

Citations

2024 N.D. 92 (N.D. 2024)