Interest of D.Q.
In the Interest of D.Q., D.M., S.S., and C.W., Children
Constance L. Cleveland, Petitioner and Appellee
Director, Cass County Social
Services, S.S., L.Q., E.M., J.W.,
D.Q., C.W., Respondents
D.M., S.S., and Benjamin Thomas,
Guardian Ad Litem, Respondents and Appellees
S.S., Respondent and Appellant
East Central Judicial District,
Judge Georgia Dawson
|Nature of Action:||Juvenile Law|
|Term:||09/2002  Argument: 09/05/2002 1:30pm|
|ND cite:||2002 ND 188|
653 N.W.2d 713
Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:|
ISSUE I. The District Judge erred in the Standard of Review utilized by her in reviewing the Findings of the judicial referee.
A. This court, pursuant to the standard of de novo review, is required to give appreciable weight to the Findings of the judicial referee.
ISSUE II. Whether current or continuing deprivation as to the children was proven by clear and convincing evidence.
ISSUE III. Whether termination of parental rights as to one child is warranted.
Reply Brief Issues:
Issue I. The district judge erred in the standard of review utilized by her in reviewing the findings of the judicial referee.
A. This court, pursuant to the standard of de novo review, is required to give appreciable weight to the findings of the judicial referee.
Issue II. Whether current or continuing deprivation as to the children was proven by clear and convincing evidence.
Issue III. Whether termination of parental rights as to one child is warranted.
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
I. Whether the district court judge erred in the review and reversal of the referee's decision.
II. Whether the petitioner has proven, pursuant to N.D.C.C. 27-20-26(4) that the order placing D.Q.. and D.M. in the custody of Cass County Social Services should be extended.
A. Were the children "deprived children"
B. Were the aims and goals of the prior order met
III. Whether the petitioner has proven termination of parental rights is justified under N.D.C.C. 27-20-44.
A. Was the child a "deprived child"
B. Is the deprivation likely to continue
C. Will there be harm to the child
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
Issue I. The district court applied the proper standard of review to the juvenile court's decision.
Issue II: The evidence at trial demonstrates, by clear and convincing evidence, that D.M. and S.S. are deprived children.
Issue III: The State has met its burden of proof for terminating the mother's parental rights to the child, S.S.
|Add Docket 20020078 RSS|
|1||03/21/2002||NOTICE OF APPEAL: 03/20/2002|
|2||03/21/2002||ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 03/20/2002|
|3||03/21/2002||This matter is consolidated with 20020079; make all entries except DIS and MAN in this case|
|4||03/28/2002||Letter dated March 28, 2002 from Charles Chinquist that he is court-appointed therefore no|
|5||03/28/2002||no filing fee is required.|
|6||04/19/2002||TRANSCRIPT DATED 8-16-01 & 8-17-01 (2 vols.)|
|7||04/22/2002||DISK - (TRA)(8-16-01 & 8-17-01)(e-mailed)|
|8||04/22/2002||RECORD ON APPEAL (3 VOLS.), EXHIBITS, & TRANSCRIPTS (5) (Not rec'd: 14,31,35,57,58,76,80,82,85,88|
|9||04/22/2002||(Steno Notes) and 41,44,47,51,63,111,116,122,175,197 (Tapes)|
|10||04/22/2002||(ROA IN 20020079 ENTERED AS ROA CODE IN THAT CASE)|
|11||04/29/2002||Faxed letter from Charles Chinquist dated 4-29-02 RE: Transcript matters|
|12||04/30/2002||Letter dated 4-29-02 from Charles Chinquist (re TRA)|
|13||05/16/2002||TRANSCRIPT DATED August 15, 2001|
|14||05/16/2002||DISK of TRA dated 8-15-01 (electronically transmitted)|
|15||06/25/2002||MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF; AFF. OF CHARLES CHINQUIST IN SUPPORT OF MOTION|
|16||06/25/2002||ACTION BY CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK (MAT). Granted: 06/27/2002|
|19||07/09/2002||DISK - ATB|
|20||07/09/2002||Corrected signature page for ATB and corrected cover pages for ATB & ATA|
|21||07/19/2002||Faxed letter dated 7-19-02 from Benjamin E. Thomas, Guardian Ad Litem, stating he doesn't intend to|
|22||07/19/2002||be present at OA unless required by the Court|
|25||07/30/2002||DISK - AEB|
|26||07/30/2002||APPELLEE BRIEF (Guardian Ad Litem for D.M. and S.S., Children)|
|27||07/31/2002||DISK - AE1 (Guardian Ad Litem)|
|28||08/09/2002||Table of Contents for AEA|
|29||08/15/2002||REPLY BRIEF of Appellant|
|30||08/16/2002||DISK - RYB|
|31||08/20/2002||ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE (Guardian Ad Litem's request to waive OA on behalf of Appellees D.M. & S.S.. Granted|
|32||09/05/2002||APPEARANCES: C. Charles Chinquist (present also was his legal assistant Jodie Schreier);|
|33||09/05/2002||Constance L. Cleveland|
|34||09/05/2002||ARGUED: Chinquist; Cleveland (Vol Y; Page 19)|
|35||09/05/2002||ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|36||10/09/2002||APPLICATION TO GRANT A STAY, BRIEF IN SUPPORT AND ATTACHMENTS (Fax)|
|37||10/09/2002||ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (Application to Grant Stay). Granted|
|38||10/09/2002||Order of Limited Remand Mailed to Parties|
|39||10/10/2002||Original of previously faxed Application to Grant at Stay, Brief in Support and Attachments|
|40||10/18/2002||Supplemental Clerk's Certificate dated 10-17-02 (Entry Nos. 213 through 225)|
|41||10/18/2002||(Supplemental Clerk's Certificate in 20020079 is entered as STA code in 20020079)|
|43||12/04/2002||SPLIT OPINION: VandeWalle, Gerald W.|
|44||12/04/2002||Concur Specially: Neumann, William A.: CONCUR|
|45||12/05/2002||Order/Judgment Mailed to Parties|
|47||12/31/2002||RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE|
|48||07/14/2008||EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed|