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|
|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|
|17||06/27/2002 APPELLANT BRIEF|
|18||06/27/2002 APPELLANT APPENDIX|
|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|
|23||07/29/2002 APPELLEE BRIEF|
|24||07/29/2002 APPELLEE APPENDIX|
|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)|
|42||12/04/2002 DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED|
|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|