Summary
The Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit affirmed a judgment terminating the parental rights of J.N.C. and M.T.C. to A.N.C. and certifying the child for adoption. The court held that the parents failed to substantially comply with their case plans, that the Louisiana Department of Children and Family Services made reasonable efforts toward reunification, and that no significant improvement was reasonably expected in the near future. The court also granted the parents’ motion to strike portions of the appellate exhibits filed after the termination hearing and judgment.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court manifestly erred in finding by clear and convincing evidence that the parents failed to substantially comply with their case plans.
- Whether the trial court manifestly erred in finding that DCFS made reasonable efforts to assist the parents with their case plans.
- Whether the trial court manifestly erred in finding that there was no reasonable expectation of significant improvement in the parents' condition or conduct in the near future.
- Whether termination of the parents' parental rights was in A.N.C.'s best interest.
- Whether portions of the appellate exhibits filed after the termination hearing and judgment should be stricken from the appellate record.
Holdings
- Documents filed after the termination hearing and judgment were not part of the record on appeal and could not be considered; the motion to strike those portions of the exhibits was granted.
- The trial court did not manifestly err in finding by clear and convincing evidence that the parents failed to substantially comply with their case plans and that there was no reasonable expectation of significant improvement in their condition or conduct in the near future.
- The trial court did not err in finding that DCFS made reasonable efforts to assist both parents in completing their case plans.
- The trial court did not manifestly err in finding that termination of both parents' parental rights was in A.N.C.'s best interest and in certifying her as eligible for adoption.
Key quotations
“Our review on appeal “is limited strictly to the record as it existed at the time the underlying judgment was rendered.”” (4)
“Given her young age and the need for permanency, the trial court also did not err in finding that termination was in the best interest of the child and certifying her as eligible for adoption.” (13)
Factual background
A.N.C. was removed from her parents' custody after a report that she was exposed to drugs through breastfeeding and the parents denied DCFS access to her. The parents' case plans required, among other things, stable housing and employment, agency contact, parental contributions, substance-abuse and mental-health services, random drug screens, visitation, and parenting classes. Although both parents visited the child and completed mental-health assessments, they failed to establish stable housing or income, maintain regular contact with DCFS, make parental contributions, complete substance-abuse treatment or required drug screens, and, in M.T.C.'s case, complete parenting classes. A.N.C. was two years old, had been in state custody since infancy, and was doing well and bonded with her adoptive placement.
Procedural history
A.N.C. was removed from her parents' custody in October 2023, adjudicated a child in need of care, and placed in foster and then adoptive care. The trial court originally terminated both parents' rights in September 2024, but the Third Circuit partially reversed and remanded because it could not determine whether the trial court had examined the correct child-in-need-of-care record. On remand, the trial court reviewed the relevant records and prior hearing evidence, again terminated the parents' rights, and certified A.N.C. for adoption. The parents timely appealed, and the appellate court affirmed.