327 P.3d 1203
Utah Ct. App.2013Background
- K.J. was born in April 2010 to Mother, who lived in Ogden, Utah with her brother and sister-in-law; Father is K.J.'s natural father and largely inactive in contact or support.
- In July 2010, K.J. was taken to an emergency room with multiple fractures and chronic subdural injuries indicating inflicted trauma, likely two to three weeks old.
- On August 2–12, 2010 the juvenile court placed K.J. in the Division's custody and adjudicated her as abused and neglected, ordering reunification services and a plan requiring housing, stable employment, and child support arrangements via ORS.
- K.J. was placed with foster parents; a permanency hearing was set for early 2011; Mother made some progress but failed to secure stable housing and employment and to contact ORS for child support.
- In March 2011 the State petitioned to terminate Mother's and Father's parental rights; Foster Parents later filed a third‑party termination petition; the State withdrew its petition in August 2011, and in November 2011 the juvenile court entered findings terminating Mother's and Father's parental rights.; the appeal followed.
- The court applied reunification timelines and ultimately concluded that there was no remaining time for reunification and upheld termination based on grounds and best interests.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Act timelines apply to private termination petitions | Mother: timelines apply to this proceeding; Division vs private petition distinction does not change applicability. | Respondent: timelines apply to all termination petitions, including private ones. | Timelines apply to this proceeding. |
| Whether the Act precludes additional reunification time | Mother: some time remained for reunification under §314(18). | Court: after extended period, reunification services must be terminated. | No additional reunification time remained. |
| Whether termination is not against the clear weight of the evidence | Mother asserts weight of evidence favors continued parental adjustment and care. | Court found failure to adjust and unfitness supported by evidence. | Termination not against the clear weight of the evidence. |
| Whether best interests support termination and adoption by Foster Parents | Mother challenges the best‑interest determination. | Best interests favored termination and adoption by foster parents. | Best interests support termination. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re S.F., 268 P.3d 831 (Utah App. 2012) (recitation of statutory timelines and standard of review)
- In re A.K., 285 P.3d 772 (Utah App. 2012) (clear weight of the evidence; balancing parental past and present conduct)
- In re B.R., 171 P.3d 435 (Utah 2007) (weighing past conduct against present abilities; deference to trial court)
- In re J.B., 58 P.3d 958 (Utah App. 2002) (burden shifting in termination proceedings after evidence supports termination)
- In re K.F., 201 P.3d 985 (Utah App. 2009) (marshal evidence burden and standard for parental adjustment findings)