In re Interest of Becka P., 296 Neb. 365

Parents Robert and Veronica appealed juvenile adjudications finding their three children neglected and placing custody with DHHS; adjudications affirmed by Court of Appeals and mandate issued later.
Juvenile court had previously ordered speech/language and early childhood development assessments to be performed by the Educational Services Unit (ESU).
Parents signed consent forms with language disclaiming voluntariness and refused to permit information release; ESU declined to proceed; DHHS could not sign the consents by regulation.
While the adjudication appeals were pending, county attorney filed show-cause motions seeking enforcement for failure to complete ordered assessments.
At the show-cause hearing the court declined to find contempt but appointed an attorney as an "educational surrogate" with "all educational rights" for each child, with no stated limits on duration or scope.
Parents appealed the surrogate appointment orders; Nebraska Supreme Court considered (1) whether those orders were final/appealable and (2) whether the juvenile court had jurisdiction and authority to appoint the surrogate while appeals were pending.

Issue	Parents' Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether appointment of an educational surrogate while adjudication appeals were pending was a valid exercise of juvenile court jurisdiction	Appeal divested juvenile court of jurisdiction; court could not issue or rule on show-cause or appoint surrogate during appeals	Juvenile court retains supervisory/ enforcement jurisdiction while appeals pending; statute allows enforcement of prior orders	Held: Juvenile court had authority to issue and rule on show-cause and appoint surrogate to enforce prior orders while appeals pending
Whether surrogate appointment was improper civil-contempt sanction without ability to purge	Appointment was an unconditional, punitive removal of educational rights without opportunity to purge by signing consent forms	Court did not find contempt; appointment was not imposed as a contempt sanction but to enforce orders and permit assessments	Held: No contempt finding; appointment was not a contempt-based punitive sanction and claim lacked factual support

Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (recognizes parental fundamental right to direct child's upbringing)
Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (parental liberty interest in directing child's education)
Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (parental rights as fundamental liberties)
In re Interest of Octavio B. et al., 290 Neb. 589 (analysis of what constitutes a substantial right in juvenile context)
In re Interest of Cassandra B. & Moira B., 290 Neb. 619 (orders affecting education can implicate substantial parental rights)
In re Interest of Walter W., 274 Neb. 859 (juvenile proceedings as special proceedings for appealability analysis)
In re Interest of Jedidiah P., 267 Neb. 258 (limitations on juvenile court jurisdiction while appeals pending)
In re Interest of Thomas M., 282 Neb. 316 (juvenile courts' authority to punish contempt)