Corley v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
556 S.W.3d 538
Ark. Ct. App.2018Background
- DHS removed four children (ages 1–6) after an unannounced visit revealed filthy home conditions, lack of diapers, and parents' positive tests for methamphetamine; oldest child also tested positive. DHS took a 72-hour hold and the children were adjudicated dependent-neglected (11/18/2016).
- Case plan required drug abstinence, random screens, substance-abuse assessment/treatment, parenting classes, counseling, stable housing/income/transportation, and psychological evaluation.
- Over 14 months parents attended some services but failed to complete required substance-abuse assessments/treatment; both tested positive for methamphetamine shortly before the termination hearing (11/29/2017).
- Therapist for oldest child (GB) advised visits be stopped due to behavioral risk; DHS adoption specialist testified children were adoptable (sibling-group adoption "very good" likelihood but not guaranteed).
- Trial court terminated parental rights under Arkansas Code § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(i) (failure to remedy after 12 months) and found termination in the children’s best interest; parents appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DHS made meaningful efforts to rehabilitate (12‑month failure-to-remedy) | Corley/Bilbrey: DHS failed to provide/pay for outpatient treatment (so failure to remedy not their fault) | DHS: provided a range of services; parents failed to complete assessments/treatment and didn’t progress to unsupervised visitation | Court held DHS made meaningful efforts; statutory ground proven by clear and convincing evidence |
| Whether continued parental drug use constitutes potential harm for best-interest analysis | Parents: recent positive tests were a lapse; therapeutic engagement with GB and improved home support best-interest exception | DHS: ongoing meth use was the primary risk that led to removal; recent positives show continued potential harm | Court held continued meth use supports potential harm; termination is in children’s best interest |
| Whether adoptability or lack of guaranteed sibling-group adoption defeats best-interest finding | Parents: no guarantee siblings would be adopted together; more time should be given to attempt reunification | DHS: children are adoptable and sibling-group adoption likelihood is good; permanency needed | Court held adoptability supported termination; lack of guarantee did not require continued reunification |
| Whether trial court findings were clearly erroneous under de novo review | Parents: overall trial-court judgment was mistaken given some compliance and employment | State: record supports findings (positive tests, failure to complete treatment, no unsupervised visits) | Court affirmed — no clear error; affirmed termination and best-interest finding |
Key Cases Cited
- Bunch v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 523 S.W.3d 913 (Ark. Ct. App. 2017) (standard of review and burden in termination appeals)
- Contreras v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 474 S.W.3d 510 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015) (proof of one statutory ground is sufficient)
- Chaffin v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 471 S.W.3d 251 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015) (best-interest factors include adoptability and potential harm)
- Welch v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 378 S.W.3d 290 (Ark. Ct. App. 2010) (court need not find actual harm; potential harm suffices)
- Abdi v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 544 S.W.3d 603 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018) (potential harm viewed forward-looking and broadly)
- Rhine v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 386 S.W.3d 577 (Ark. Ct. App. 2011) (distinguishing a minor lapse from ongoing substance-use risk)
- Allen v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 384 S.W.3d 7 (Ark. Ct. App. 2011) (continued positive drug tests during dependency-neglect case demonstrate potential harm)
- Couch v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 832 S.W.2d 265 (Ark. Ct. App. 1992) (sibling placement is an important but not controlling best-interest consideration)