Duncan v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
2014 Ark. App. 489
Ark. Ct. App.2014Background
- DHS took emergency custody of six children in July 2012 after reports of recurring domestic violence, severely unsanitary living conditions, and inadequate food; children were adjudicated dependent-neglected.
- The case goal initially was reunification; DHS provided services but case goal changed to adoption/termination in Aug. 2013.
- Duncan (mother) completed many case-plan tasks: parenting classes, domestic-violence classes, maintained stable housing since Feb. 2013, completed therapy (family and individual) and obtained employment; therapist reported progress but ongoing issues.
- Gaither (putative father) had unstable housing, tested positive for methamphetamine, failed to comply with psychosexual-evaluation recommendations, and admitted children could not be returned to him.
- Trial court terminated both parents’ rights in Jan. 2014, citing (1) failure to remedy conditions after 12 months out of the home, (2) aggravated circumstances/little likelihood services would work, and (3) willful failure to provide significant material support.
- On appeal, Arkansas Court of Appeals reversed and remanded as to Duncan (finding errors in the court’s factual findings on several statutory grounds) and affirmed termination as to Gaither; court granted Gaither’s counsel’s motion to withdraw his no-merit brief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Duncan remedied conditions that caused removal (environmental neglect/domestic violence) | Duncan: had stable home, employment, food stamps, engaged in therapy and services; separated from Gaither when ordered | DHS: Duncan had not shown sustained ability to maintain utilities, parenting judgment, or moved beyond supervised visits; minimized past violence | Reversed for Duncan — court found termination on speculation about future contact with Gaither and failures unsupported by record was clearly erroneous |
| Whether aggravated-circumstances ground supported termination for Duncan (little likelihood services would succeed) | Duncan: complied with case plan, made therapy progress; DHS delayed providing counseling and did not offer certain supports | DHS: >15 months of limited progress; continued safety concerns | Reversed for Duncan — court found DHS delay and Duncan’s compliance meant it was erroneous to find services would not work |
| Whether willful failure to provide significant material support justified termination for Duncan | Duncan: record lacks evidence of court-ordered support or payments; DHS caseworker testified parents paid no support | DHS: trial court relied on an alleged child-support order and low payments | Reversed for Duncan — trial-court finding unsupported by the record |
| Whether Gaither’s termination should be reversed | Gaither: (no-merit brief; no pro se points) argued no meritorious appellate issues | DHS: Gaither had drug positives, unstable housing, noncompliance with evaluations; termination in children’s best interest | Affirmed for Gaither — appellate court agreed no-meritorious argument existed; termination supported by clear-and-convincing evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Pine v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 379 S.W.3d 703 (Ark. App. 2010) (standard of review and requirements for termination of parental rights)
- Linker-Flores v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 194 S.W.3d 739 (Ark. 2004) (procedural authority cited regarding no-merit appeals and counsel withdrawal)