Dept. of Human Services v. L. R. R.

347 Or. App. 736 (2026) · Court of Appeals of Oregon · March 18, 2026 · No. A188201

Summary

The Oregon Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court erred in asserting dependency jurisdiction based on the mother's failure to meet the child's educational needs because the evidence did not establish a current, nonspeculative threat of harm. The court otherwise affirmed jurisdiction based on the mother's prolonged absence, unavailability, failure to meet the child's basic and emotional needs, and inadequate parenting skills, and remanded for entry of a modified judgment.

Holdings

  1. The juvenile court erred in asserting jurisdiction on the ground that mother's failure to ensure S.'s school attendance and meet his educational needs presented a threat of harm because the Department of Human Services did not establish a nexus between that conduct and a current, nonspeculative risk of harm rising to the level required for juvenile court intervention.
  2. The juvenile court did not err in asserting jurisdiction based on mother's physical absence from the home, unavailability to S., inability to meet S.'s basic and emotional needs, and lack of parenting skills, knowledge, motivation, and judgment.
  3. When de novo review is not requested and the case is not exceptional, the Court of Appeals reviews whether the evidence was sufficient to permit the juvenile court's determination, viewing the evidence and permissible derivative inferences in the light most favorable to the disposition and deferring to supported factual and credibility findings.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the evidence established that mother's failure to meet S.'s educational needs created a current, nonspeculative threat of serious loss or injury sufficient to support dependency jurisdiction.
  2. Whether, considering the totality of the circumstances, the evidence established a current, nonspeculative threat of harm to S.'s safety based on mother's physical absence, unavailability, failure to meet basic and emotional needs, and lack of parenting skills, knowledge, motivation, and judgment.
  3. What standard of review governed the appellate review of the juvenile court's jurisdictional findings.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (8)

  • Dept. of Human Services v. D. L., 308 Or. App. 295, 297, 479 P.3d 1092 (2020), rev. den., 367 Or. 668 (2021)(followed)
  • Dept. of Human Services v. T. N. M., 315 Or. App. 160, 162, 501 P.3d 76 (2021)(followed)
  • Dept. of Human Services v. A. J. G., 304 Or. App. 221, 228 n. 4, 465 P.3d 293 (2020), rev. den., 366 Or. 826 (2020)(followed)
  • Dept. of Human Services v. A. F., 243 Or. App. 379, 385, 259 P.3d 957 (2011)(followed)
  • Dept. of Human Services v. K. C. F., 282 Or. App. 12, 19, 383 P.3d 931 (2016)(followed)
  • Dept. of Human Services v. L. E. F., 307 Or. App. 254, 258, 476 P.3d 119 (2020), rev. den., 367 Or. 559 (2021)(followed)
  • Dept. of Human Services v. S. D. I., 259 Or. App. 116, 121, 312 P.3d 608 (2013)(followed)
  • Dept. of Human Services v. C. J. T., 258 Or. App. 57, 62, 308 P.3d 307 (2013)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…