Earls v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
511 S.W.3d 373
Ark. Ct. App.2017Background
- Twins born July 16, 2014, tested positive for methamphetamine and were removed from mother’s custody; Jacob Earls was a putative father whose whereabouts were initially unknown.
- Department opened dependency-neglect proceedings; Earls was later incarcerated and served; DNA testing (May 2015) confirmed paternity (99.99%).
- Permanency-planning order found Earls’s parental rights had not attached; Earls did not appeal that order.
- Department filed petition to terminate Earls’s parental rights (Jan. 2016), citing two statutory grounds: (1) failure to remedy conditions preventing placement despite meaningful efforts by the Department, and (2) willful failure to provide significant material support or maintain meaningful contact for 12 months.
- At termination hearing Earls testified he had attempted some contact (letters, motion for DNA, class participation while incarcerated) but had limited access to services while imprisoned and had not visited or financially supported the children; Department worker testified placement with Earls was impossible while he was incarcerated.
- Circuit court found statutory grounds proven (both listed grounds), terminated Earls’s parental rights, and this appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Earls) | Defendant's Argument (DHS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(i)(b) (failure to remedy conditions despite meaningful DHS efforts) applies | Earls: DHS did not make reasonable/meaningful efforts while he was incarcerated; incarceration prevented him from meeting case-plan tasks | DHS: Imprisonment is the condition; Department is not required to remediate incarceration; services limited while incarcerated | Court: Held DHS’s showing sufficient; not convinced findings were clearly erroneous — this ground supports termination |
| Whether § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(ii)(a) (willful failure to provide material support or maintain meaningful contact for 12 months) applies | Earls: He made efforts to contact DHS and could not support children while indigent/incarcerated; had not been ordered to provide support | DHS: Earls made no efforts before incarceration; no evidence DHS prevented contact; no support or visitation occurred | Court: Held evidence supported finding Earls willfully failed to maintain meaningful contact and provide support; ground supports termination |
| Whether parental rights had attached (so termination permissible) | Earls: Circuit court first recognized him as father only in termination order, so certain grounds requiring 12-month period shouldn’t apply | DHS: Treated Earls as legal/putative father throughout; paternity established and DHS proceeded accordingly; permanency order not appealed | Court: Did not reach a separate attachment challenge on appeal; treated him as father and found statutory grounds satisfied |
| Whether termination was in children’s best interests | Earls: Not contested on appeal | DHS: Children are adoptable; foster parent able to adopt | Court: Best-interest finding not challenged; termination affirmed on statutory-ground findings |
Key Cases Cited
- Dinkins v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 344 Ark. 207, 40 S.W.3d 286 (Ark. 2001) (standard and gravity of termination-of-parental-rights proceedings)
- M.T. v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 58 Ark. App. 302, 952 S.W.2d 177 (Ark. Ct. App. 1997) (best-interest proof standard requires clear and convincing evidence)
- Vail v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 486 S.W.3d 229 (Ark. Ct. App. 2016) (definition of clear-and-convincing-evidence and appellate review standard)
- Yarborough v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 96 Ark. App. 247, 240 S.W.3d 626 (Ark. Ct. App. 2006) (standard for clear-error review in termination cases)