Crystal Faye Ward v. Newport News Department of Human Services
1280201
| Va. Ct. App. | Jul 13, 2021Background
- Juvenile & Domestic Relations Court terminated Crystal Faye Ward’s parental rights to M.W. on October 15, 2019; Ward appealed to the circuit court on October 18, 2019.
- A circuit-court hearing on the appeal was held November 9, 2020; Ward did not appear and the court waited over 40 minutes before granting a motion to dismiss the appeal.
- The circuit court entered the dismissal order on December 14, 2020; Ward later appealed the dismissal, claiming she was involuntarily committed to a mental hospital and could not appear.
- The appellate record did not contain a timely-filed transcript or a written statement of facts from the November 9 hearing; an appendix transcript existed but was never filed in the circuit court as required by Rule 5A:8.
- The circuit court’s dismissal order does not show a continuance request or a denial, and counsel’s endorsement “Seen and objected to” does not identify the basis for the objection.
- Court of Appeals summarily affirmed: Ward failed to provide the necessary record for review and there was no identifiable ruling denying a continuance in the record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the circuit court erred by dismissing Ward’s appeal for her nonappearance and denying a continuance when she was involuntarily committed | Ward: She was hospitalized involuntarily and could not appear; court should have continued the hearing | Circuit court/DHS: Record shows Ward did not appear; no motion/denial appears in the court record; appellant did not file transcript to prove otherwise | Affirmed — appeal summarily affirmed because appellant failed to include a transcript or written statement; no ruling denying continuance in the record |
| Whether counsel’s endorsement “Seen and objected to” preserved the continuance objection | Ward: Counsel objected to the dismissal (endorsed the order) | DHS/Court: “Seen and objected to” is normally too vague to preserve error unless the ruling’s nature made the basis obvious | Held: Not sufficient to preserve this specific issue; record does not reflect Ward’s mental-health excuse |
| Whether the appellate record was adequate for review under Rule 5A:8 | Ward: Appendix contains a transcript of the November 9 hearing | DHS/Court: Appendix transcript was not filed in the circuit court within the Rule 5A:8 deadline and thus is not part of the record | Held: Transcript (or written statement) is indispensable; failure to timely file it bars appellate consideration of the challenged ruling |
Key Cases Cited
- Yafi v. Stafford Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 69 Va. App. 539 (2018) (appellate review in termination appeals viewed in the light most favorable to the prevailing party below)
- Smith v. Commonwealth, 34 Va. App. 766 (2000) (transcript-filing requirements must be strictly followed when indispensable to the appeal)
- Turner v. Commonwealth, 2 Va. App. 96 (1986) (no authority to create exceptions to appellate transcript filing rules)
- McBride v. Commonwealth, 24 Va. App. 30 (1997) (a court speaks through its orders; orders are presumed to reflect what transpired)
- Canales v. Torres Orellana, 67 Va. App. 759 (2017) (formal endorsement "Seen and objected to" is ordinarily insufficient to preserve error absent an obvious basis)
- Williams v. Commonwealth, 57 Va. App. 341 (2010) (no ruling exists for review if the record does not reflect a denied motion)