White v. Moody

757 Citing cases

  1. In re Kendra P.

    No. E2015-02429-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Jul. 28, 2016)   Cited 3 times
    In Kendra P., the mother raised as her only issue on appeal the best interest analysis concerning her seventeen-year-old daughter, who was in a foster home separate from her three younger siblings, was less than a year away from turning eighteen, and had expressed a strong desire to retain the parent-child relationship with her mother.

    Valentine, 79 S.W.3d at 546. If the petitioner establishes grounds for termination, only then does the court determine whether termination is in the best interests of the child. In re Marr, 194 S.W.3d 490, 498 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005); White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187, 192 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). The statute enumerates factors for the best interests analysis that the court "shall consider," but, as opposed to the inquiry into grounds for termination, the best interests analysis "is not limited to" the factors enumerated in the statute.

  2. In re Marr

    194 S.W.3d 490 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 250 times
    Concluding that the father waived an argument by "failing to raise it in the trial court in the first instance"

    Osborn v. Marr, 127 S.W.3d at 741. See In re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838, 881 (Tenn.Ct.App. Aug.25, 2005) perm. app. dismissed (Tenn. Nov. 4, 2005); White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187, 192 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2004); In re C.D.C., Jr., No. E2003-01832-COA-R3-PT, 2004 WL 1243994, at *8 (Tenn.Ct.App. June 7, 2004) (No Tenn. R.App. P. 11 application filed); State Dep't of Children's Servs. v. Whaley, No. E2001-00765-COA-R3-CV, 2002 WL 1116430, at *9 (Tenn.Ct.App. May 30, 2002) (No Tenn. R.App. P. 11 application filed); State Dep't of Children's Servs. v. C.S.M., No. E2000-02806-COA-R3-JV, 2002 WL 385870, at *6 (Tenn.Ct.App. Mar.13, 2002), perm. app. denied (Tenn. Sept. 16, 2002); Ray v. Ray, 83 S.W.3d 726, 732 n. 7 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2001). In 1971, the General Assembly enacted a statute expressly allowing the mother of a child born out of wedlock to file a petition to adopt the child, thereby effectively terminating the biological father's parental rights.

  3. In re Elijah H.

    No. M2020-01548-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 6, 2021)   Cited 6 times

    Furthermore, the best interest of a child must be determined from the child's perspective and not the parent's. White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187, 194 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). The version of Tennessee Code Annotated § 36-1-113(i) (Supp.

  4. In re Seth MC.

    No. M2017-02562-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Jun. 20, 2018)   Cited 3 times
    Concluding that "DCS failed to show that it made reasonable efforts during the relevant four-month periods to assist Mother in obtaining suitable housing, as it must"

    Once a ground for termination is established by clear and convincing evidence, the trial court or the reviewing court conducts a best interests analysis. In re Angela E., 303 S.W.3d at 251 (citing In re Marr, 194 S.W.3d 490, 498 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005); White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187, 192 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004)). "The best interests analysis is separate from and subsequent to the determination that there is clear and convincing evidence of grounds for termination."

  5. In re Noah S.

    No. M2017-01228-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 23, 2018)

    The requirement that the trial court make specific findings of fact and conclusions of law is not a mere technicality; rather, compliance with Section 36-1-113(k) serves an important purpose. See White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187, 191 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). "Without such findings and conclusions, this court is left to wonder on what basis the court reached its ultimate decision."

  6. In re Knox C.

    No. E2016-00768-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 3, 2016)

    The child's best interest must be viewed from the child's, rather than the parent's, perspective. White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187, 194 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). Ultimately, the relevancy and weight given to each factor depends on the unique facts of each case.

  7. In re Domingo W.

    No. W2014-01435-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Jul. 23, 2015)

    When at least one ground for termination of parental rights has been established, the petitioner must then prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination of the parent's rights is in the child's best interest. White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187, 192 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994). When a parent has been found to be unfit (upon establishment of ground(s) for termination of parental rights), the interests of parent and child diverge.

  8. In re Jayden G.

    No. W2014-00881-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Sep. 30, 2014)   Cited 3 times
    Concluding that the mother's continued use of alcohol and relationship with a drug user were insufficient to prove persistence of conditions when there was no evidence that the mother continued to abuse drugs, the condition cited as the basis for the child's removal

    When at least one ground for termination of parental rights has been established, the petitioner must then prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination of the parent's rights is in the child's best interest. White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187, 192 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994). When a parent has been found to be unfit (upon establishment of ground(s) for termination of parental rights), the interests of parent and child diverge.

  9. In Matter of D.P.M.

    No. M2005-02183-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Sep. 8, 2006)   Cited 3 times

    The existence of a ground does not inexorably lead to that conclusion. In re Audrey S. Victoria L., 182 S.W.3d 838, 876 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2005); White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2004). To conclude otherwise would render meaningless the statutory requirement that both grounds and best interest be proved.

  10. In re Giorgianna H

    205 S.W.3d 508 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 229 times
    Stating "The success of a parent's remedial efforts generally depends on the Department's assistance and support."

    While the parent's interests do not evaporate upon a finding of unfitness, Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 753, 102 S.Ct. 1388, 1394-95, 71 L.Ed.2d 599 (1982), the focus of the proceedings shifts to the best interests of the child. While a finding of parental unfitness is a necessary prerequisite to terminating a parent's rights, a finding of unfitness does not necessarily require that the parent's rights be terminated. White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187, 193 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2004); In re Termination of Parental Rights to Alexander V., 271 Wis.2d 1, 678 N.W.2d 856, 863 (2004). Not all parental misconduct is irredeemable.