Department of Human Services v. W. A. C.
263 Or. App. 382
| Or. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Nakamoto, J. reviews consolidated juvenile dependency appeals by father challenging (a) the March 2013 judgment asserting jurisdiction over his two children, and (b) the October 2012 judgment based on mother’s admissions.
- Court found error in the 2012 judgment entered before father’s contested hearing and held jurisdiction cannot be based on one parent’s admission when the other parent contesting it appeared and was served.
- Evidence showed mother and father had domestic-violence-related allegations; mother admitted A and B in 2012; father contested; hearings occurred in Oct 2012 and Mar 2013, with various findings.
- Court ultimately concluded the 2012 judgment was entered unlawfully and that the 2013 jurisdictional finding was not supported by the totality of the circumstances.
- The matter was remanded with instructions to set aside the October 2012 judgment; the March 2013 judgment was reversed and remanded for disposition consistent with the rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the 2012 judgment entered before father’s contested hearing improper? | Father contends jurisdiction cannot attach based on mother’s admission. | DHS agrees entry was erroneous but seeks limited remedy. | Yes; the 2012 judgment was improper and must be set aside. |
| Was the 2013 jurisdictional judgment supported by sufficient evidence? | Evidence insufficient to prove A and H; no current threat of harm. | DHS argues evidence supports endangerment under totality of circumstances. | No; jurisdiction not warranted; evidence insufficient. |
| Could the court rely on mother’s admission to establish A when father contested it? | Mother’s admission alone cannot conclusively prove A. | Admissions may be considered but cannot be sole basis. | Error to give conclusive effect to mother’s admission; improper basis for A. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dept. of Human Services v. A. D. G., 260 Or App 525 (2014) (broad authority to modify or set aside judgments; abuse of discretion if outside legally correct range)
- Dept. of Human Services v. S. P., 249 Or App 76 (2012) (jurisdictional inquiry focuses on endangerment of child; totality of circumstances)
- State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. D. J., 215 Or App 146 (2007) (standards for abuse of discretion in setting aside judgments)
- Dept. of Human Services v. C. F., 258 Or App 50 (2013) (focus on totality of the child’s circumstances at hearing; likelihood of harm)
- Dept. of Human Services v. C. J. T., 258 Or App 57 (2013) (current risk of harm; nonspeculative risk assessment at hearing)
- Smith v. Mehrer, 316 Or 646 (1993) (predecessor principles on endangerment; preservation of contested issues)
- Dept. of Human Services v. S. M., 355 Or 241 (2014) (jurisdiction and custody consequences; rights affected by wardship)
- Dept. of Human Services v. D. S. F., 246 Or App 302 (2011) (parental intervention to protect child from domestic violence; sufficiency considerations)
- Dept. of Human Services v. C. Z., 236 Or App 436 (2010) (environmental risk; need for actual harm at time of hearing)