Dornan v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
2014 Ark. App. 355
Ark. Ct. App.2014Background
- Cassie Lackey Dornan appeals an order terminating her parental rights to S.L. (born 2004) and M.L. (born 2005) along with Michael Lackey; ADHS sought termination under four statutory grounds.
- The termination petition alleged dependent-neglected status and aggravated circumstances as bases, with the claim that reunification was unlikely.
- Children had been out of Dornan’s custody since 2009; Dornan lived in Oklahoma while the cases occurred in Arkansas.
- ADHS provided limited services to Dornan; she had minimal contact with the children for years and attended hearings pro se.
- The circuit court found four grounds by clear and convincing evidence, including aggravated circumstances, and concluded termination was in the juveniles’ best interests; the court denied Dornan’s due-process challenges about notice.
- The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed the termination on aggravated circumstances and criticized ADHS for failing to provide services to Dornan; a separate concurrence criticized ADHS’s handling of the case.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the termination grounds pled and proven against Dornan were proper | Dornan: grounds (i), (ii), (vii) and (ix) were not pled or proven against her | ADHS: grounds either pled or supported by evidence | First three grounds cannot sustain; aggravated circumstances upheld as proper basis |
| Whether aggravated circumstances were shown by clear and convincing evidence | Dornan challenges the credibility and sufficiency of the proof | ADHS asserts proven by the evidence and the court’s credibility determinations | Aggravated- Circumstances ground affirmed; termination upheld on this ground |
| Whether due-process notice requirements were satisfied for the grounds | Notice was insufficient for the grounds not pled against Dornan | ADHS contends notice was adequate under the petition and proceedings | Notice deficiencies for the non-aggravated grounds; aggravated-ground ruling preserved under due process findings |
Key Cases Cited
- Dinkins v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 344 Ark. 207 (2001) (clear-and-convincing standard; de novo review of termination)
- Hughes v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2010 Ark. App. 526 (2010) (clear and convincing evidence standard in termination cases)
- Jones v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2011 Ark. App. 632 (2011) (due-process notice requirements in termination cases)
- Jackson v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2013 Ark. App. 411 (2013) (notice and defense principles in termination proceedings)
- Cotton v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2012 Ark. App. 455 (2012) (discusses permanency and child welfare considerations)