Howerton v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
2016 Ark. App. 560
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- G.E., born 9/12/2014, was removed after birth; DHS filed dependency-neglect petition because mother was incarcerated. Putative father Brandon Edgar was initially listed; Edward Howerton (appellant) was not initially a party.
- An agreed adjudication (Nov. 2014) added Howerton as G.E.’s "legal father" because he was married to G.E.’s mother when G.E. was conceived; DHS was ordered to amend pleadings to make him a party.
- DNA/paternity evidence later established that Edgar is the biological father and Edgar’s name appears on G.E.’s birth certificate; the circuit court treated Edgar as a legal/biological father.
- DHS sought and the court later terminated Howerton’s parental rights, relying in part on (1) Howerton’s 30-year imprisonment and associated inability to reunify and (2) the court’s view that Howerton nevertheless remained a legal father by virtue of marriage and thus his rights could be terminated.
- Howerton appealed, arguing he had been divested of parental rights once the court found Edgar to be the child’s legal/biological father and therefore had no rights that could be terminated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (DHS) | Defendant's Argument (Howerton) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Howerton had parental rights that could be terminated after court found Edgar to be biological/legal father | Howerton remained a legal father by virtue of marriage and thus DHS could seek termination of his parental rights to clear child for permanency | Once Edgar was found to be the child’s legal father, Howerton was divested of parental status and had no rights to terminate | Reversed: Howerton had no parental rights after Edgar was found to be the legal father, so termination was erroneous |
| Whether a child may have two "legal fathers" simultaneously | DHS/court implicitly treated both men as having legal father status (marital presumption + birth-certificate/paternity finding) | Howerton: cannot have dual legal fathers; once Edgar is legal father Howerton lacks rights | Court held a child cannot have two legal fathers; finding Edgar as legal father divested Howerton of rights |
| Proper statutory construction of "parent" under Ark. Code § 9-27-303(40) | Termination is proper to clear all statutory parents to provide permanency | The statute’s disjunctive definitions create exclusive categories; a man married at conception is a parent only until adjudicated otherwise; here Howerton had no remaining status | Court construed the statute to preclude dual fathership and concluded Howerton had no rights to terminate (basis for reversal) |
| Whether termination order should be reversed where the trial court treated a person as a legal parent but later found he was not the sole/legal father | DHS argued termination was necessary to clear all possible competing parental claims and provide permanency | Howerton argued termination was impossible because he was not a parent after Edgar’s paternity finding | Court reversed termination as clearly erroneous because Howerton had no parental rights to terminate |
Key Cases Cited
- Whitehead v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2016 Ark. App. 42, 481 S.W.3d 469 (discussing termination review standard and related juvenile matters)
- Strickland v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 103 Ark. App. 193, 287 S.W.3d 633 (procedural guidance in juvenile appeals)
- Brown v. Kelton, 2011 Ark. 93, 380 S.W.3d 361 (statutory construction principles)
- McCoy v. Walker, 317 Ark. 86, 876 S.W.2d 252 (interpretation of statutory language)
- N.A.H. v. S.L.S., 9 P.3d 354 (Colo.) (authority recognizing a child may have only one legal father)
- G.F.C. v. S.G., 686 So. 2d 1382 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App.) (no dual fathership)
- In re C.N.W., 560 S.E.2d 1 (Ga.) (defining legal fatherhood categories)
- In re Custody of C.C., 1 N.E.3d 1238 (Ill. App.) (Illinois law does not permit two legal fathers)
- Helton v. Beaman, 850 N.W.2d 515 (Mich. App.) (child may have only one legal father)
- Wright v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 449 S.W.3d 721 (Ark. Ct. App.) (status-change and termination implications)
- In re T.K.Y., 205 S.W.3d 343 (Tenn.) (definitions of legal parents)
- Marriage of Morales, 968 S.W.2d 508 (Tex. App.) (only one legal father permitted)
- Pearson v. Pearson, 182 P.3d 353 (Utah) (child can have only one legal father)