In re D.H. & S.C., Juveniles, 173 A.3d 883

DCF removed two children from mother after safety concerns; children were in foster care since December 2015 and a TPR petition was filed in May 2016.
A three-day termination hearing was scheduled for October 24–26, 2016; mother had attended most prior hearings and participated in the case.
Mother did not appear at the morning of October 24; her attorney was in contact and reported mother could arrive within about 30 minutes.
The court refused a 30-minute recess, admitted DCF exhibits, heard limited testimony, and concluded the hearing less than an hour after it began.
The family court relied in part on mother’s absence as evidence of her inability to organize her life and terminated her parental rights; mother moved to reopen evidence and appealed.

Issue	Mother's Argument	State/Children's Argument	Held
Whether the court abused its discretion by refusing a brief (30‑minute) recess so mother could attend the first day of a multi‑day TPR hearing	Counsel told the court mother could arrive shortly; delay was brief and would not prejudice parties; mother had consistently participated in the case	Mother had proper notice; her absence justified proceeding and admitting documentary evidence	Reversed — court abused discretion under the unique facts; brief delay was reasonable and denial unfairly deprived mother of opportunity to participate
Whether denial of continuance and closure of the record without mother’s participation could stand and the evidence should remain closed	Denial prevented mother from testifying about treatment, medical condition, bonding, and rebutting DCF evidence; she later moved to reopen	Proceeding in her absence was permitted given notice; court had discretion to rely on the record	Remanded — termination decision vacated as to mother; family court must reopen evidence to allow mother to participate; previously admitted evidence remains in record

State v. Ahearn, 137 Vt. 253, 403 A.2d 696 (trial-court continuance decisions reviewed for abuse of discretion)
State v. Hanlon, 164 Vt. 125, 665 A.2d 603 (continuance decisions must consider individual case circumstances)
In re R.B., 152 Vt. 415, 566 A.2d 1310 (parties in TPR proceedings entitled to fair hearing and protection of fundamental parental rights)
Land Fin. Corp. v. St. Johnsbury Wiring Co., 100 Vt. 328, 137 A. 324 (refusal to grant continuance can constitute abuse of discretion when it prevents presentation of key evidence)