In the Interest of M.B. and N.B., Children

Summary

The Supreme Court of North Dakota affirmed orders terminating I.B.'s parental rights to two children and denying his request for continued visitation. The court held that I.B. received sufficient notice, that the referee's adoption of proposed findings did not require reversal, and that clear and convincing evidence supported findings of deprivation, likely continued deprivation, and probable harm. The court also held that reasonable reunification efforts had been made and deemed the visitation issue moot.

Holdings

1. A petition to terminate parental rights must provide specific factual circumstances supporting termination, rather than merely reciting statutory language. The petition and incorporated affidavit provided I.B. sufficient notice of the facts the petitioner would use, and his due process rights were not violated.
2. A juvenile referee does not improperly delegate judicial authority merely by assigning a party to prepare proposed findings, conclusions, and an order and then adopting them, even when the adoption is verbatim, provided the findings are signed or adopted by the court and are reviewed for clear error.
3. The juvenile court properly terminated I.B.'s parental rights because clear and convincing evidence established that the children were deprived, the deprivation was likely to continue or not be remedied, and the children were suffering or would probably suffer serious physical, mental, moral, or emotional harm.
4. The juvenile court properly found that Cass County Social Services made reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify the family, while I.B. failed to participate meaningfully in the available parenting assistance, therapy, and treatment services.
5. The visitation issue was moot because the Supreme Court affirmed the termination of I.B.'s parental rights.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the termination petition and supporting affidavit gave I.B. constitutionally and statutorily sufficient notice of the factual grounds for terminating his parental rights.
2. Whether the juvenile referee improperly delegated judicial authority by directing the prevailing party to prepare proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and an order, which the referee adopted.
3. Whether clear and convincing evidence established that the children were deprived, that the causes and conditions of deprivation were likely to continue or not be remedied, and that the children were suffering or would probably suffer serious harm.
4. Whether the State and Cass County Social Services made reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify the family as required by N.D.C.C. § 27-20-32.2.
5. Whether the denial of I.B.'s request for visitation during review of the termination order presented a justiciable issue.

Disposition

affirmed