Interest of R.O. | |||||||||||||
20000305 |
Interest of R.O., V.O. and J.H.
-------------- Keith Berger, Director Grand Forks County Social Services, Petitioner and Appellee v. F.O., Respondent ------------- L.H., Respondent and Appellant | ||||||||||||
Appeal from: |
Juvenile Court,
Northeast Central Judicial District,
Grand Forks County
Judge Joel D. Medd | ||||||||||||
Nature of Action: | Termination/Parental Rights | ||||||||||||
Counsel: |
| ||||||||||||
Term: | 06/2001  Argument: 06/11/2001 | ||||||||||||
ND cite: | 2001 ND 137 | ||||||||||||
NW cite: |
631 N.W.2d 159
Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Issues: |
Appellant's Statement of the Issues: (1) Whether the trial court erroneously held that north dakota rule of evidence 503 did not prohibit the disclosure and introduction into evidence of confidential communications made by appellant to her treating psychologist at the northeast human service center. (2) Whether 42 c.f.r. 2.12 prohibits the disclousre of confidential communications between the appellant and her treating psychologists. (3) Whether the appellant's constitutional right to privacy was violated by the admission of privileged information. Appellee's Statement of the Issues: I. Whether the District Court was correct when it terminated the parental rights of F.O. and L.H. to their minor children.br> A. Were the children deprived children? B. Is the deprivation likely to continue? C. Will there be harm to the children? II. Have the children been in foster care under the care, custody, and control of the county social service board for at least 450 out of the previous 660 nights? III. Is the North Dakota Rule of Evidence 503 abrogated by N.D. Cent. Code 50-25.1-10 when the petition for termination alleges child abuse or neglect? IV. Were the drug and alcohol records of F.O. and the testimony of Kim Miller properly admitted in light of 42 C.F.R. 2.64? V. Does the application of N.D. Cent. Code 50.25.1-10 violate F.O. and L.H.'s constitutional right to privacy? A. The relationship is not constitutionally protected. B. There has not been an infringement of a protected area. C. State interest exists which is sufficient to justify the intrusion. D. The intrusion was narrowly circumscribed. | ||||||||||||
![]() |
1 | 11/07/2000 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 11/06/2000 | |
2 | 11/07/2000 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 11/06/2000 | |
3 | 11/07/2000 THIS CASE IS CONFIDENTIAL | |
4 | 11/08/2000 THIS CASE IS CONSOLIDATED W/ 20000307-MAKE ALL ENTRIES EXCEPT "DIS" IN THIS CASE. | |
5 | 11/22/2000 RETENTION OF RECORD ON APPEAL (Diane Manthei): 12/26/2000 | |
6 | 11/20/2000 Letter from Steven Light that he is court-appointed with copy of order; therefore, no filing fee. | |
7 | 11/20/2000 Amended Request for Transcript signed by Robin L. Olson, dtd.11-16-00 | |
8 | 11/28/2000 Amended Request for Transcript signed by Steven M. Light, dtd. 11-22-00 | |
9 | 12/20/2000 MOT. EXT/TIME TRANSCRIPT | |
10 | 12/20/2000 ACTION BY TRIAL COURT. Granted: 02/05/2001 | |
11 | 02/05/2001 TRANSCRIPTS DATED 3-27-00 (Vol. I); 3-28-00 (Vol. II); 3-29-00 (Vol. III); 3-29-00 (Vol. IV); | |
12 | 02/05/2001 3-29-00 (Vol. V); 3-31-00 (Vol. VI); 7-25-00 (Vol. VII); 7-26-00 (Vol. VIII) | |
13 | 02/06/2001 DISKS (5) - above transcripts | |
14 | 03/14/2001 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF (F.O., father) | |
15 | 03/14/2001 ACTION BY CLERK (MAT/applies to all appellants' briefs). Granted: 04/16/2001 | |
16 | 03/15/2001 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF (L.H., mother) (fax copy) | |
17 | 03/15/2001 ACTION BY CLERK (MAT). Granted: 04/16/2001 | |
18 | 03/19/2001 Motion to Extend Appellant Brief Deadline (Same as faxed copy filed 3-15-01) | |
19 | 03/19/2001 Letter from DeWayne Johnston of 3-16-01 RE:He will be writing brief & presenting case at oral arg | |
20 | 04/16/2001 APPELLANT BRIEF of L.H. | |
21 | 04/16/2001 APPELLANT APPENDIX of L.H. | |
22 | 04/16/2001 APPELLANT BRIEF of Appellant F.O. (Entered as STA code in 20000307 (DeWayne Johnston, counsel) | |
23 | 04/16/2001 APPELLANT APPENDIX of Appellant F.O. (DeWayne Johnston, counsel) | |
24 | 04/18/2001 DISK of ATB for L.H. | |
25 | 04/18/2001 DISK - ATB (F.O.) | |
26 | 05/15/2001 APPELLEE BRIEF | |
27 | 05/15/2001 APPELLEE APPENDIX | |
28 | 05/16/2001 DISK - AEB | |
29 | 05/21/2001 Clerk's Certificate of Record dated 5-18-01 (Entry Nos. 166 & 167) | |
30 | 05/29/2001 REPLY BRIEF of Appellant F.O. | |
31 | 05/31/2001 DISK - RYB of Appellant F.O. | |
32 | 06/11/2001 MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE (faxed letter dated 6-11-01 from Steven M. Light, counsel for AT L.H.) | |
33 | 06/11/2001 ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE (re Mot. for Continuance). Denied | |
34 | 02/07/2001 RECORD ON APPEAL (2 Vols.) and Exhibits | |
35 | 06/11/2001 APPEARANCES: DeWayne Johnston for F.O.; submitted on brief by L.H.; Dale R. Rivard | |
36 | 06/11/2001 ARGUED: Johnston; submitted on brief for L.H.; Rivard (Vol. X; page 142) | |
37 | 06/11/2001 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST | |
38 | 07/20/2001 DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED | |
39 | 07/20/2001 UNANIMOUS OPINION: Sandstrom, Dale V. | |
40 | 07/20/2001 Costs on appeal awarded in favor of Appellee. | |
41 | 07/23/2001 Order/Judgment Mailed to Parties | |
42 | 08/14/2001 MANDATE | |
43 | 08/27/2001 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE | |
44 | 07/10/2007 EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed |